Italian STOVL Carrier – Cavour ?

Newest photo of Cavour in Muggiano

In 12-16 years we need replace Garibaldi with something.

Possible a common italian-uk program or the requirement are to different?
Something similar to LHA-6 design?

not such a bad idea as the joint programs with Italy tend to be good EH-101 comes to mind.

Also we have far less issues with Italy compared with France :rolleyes::D

In 12-16 years we need replace Garibaldi with something.

Possible a common italian-uk program or the requirement are to different?
Something similar to LHA-6 design?

It would be a nice start point but I don’t think there is anything left in the kitty to support that.
I think Ocean will have to soldier on with Ark Royal having her life extended to act as a second commando carrier.

Maybe in 10-15 years there’ll be more money, in which case a Cavour variant, but probably with different machinery, would make a very nice basis for an LPH. Well, a man can dream, can’t he?

In reality, I expect Ocean & Ark Royal will soldier on for rather too long, before being replaced by something a little too cheaply built, like Ocean. 🙁

I do like the Cavour, it would make a good design starting point for when the RN decide to replace Ocean. 😎

Is it just me, but she appears to be a ship with two faces. The port side is very smooth and photogenic, but the starboard side is just pug ugly with all those ramps, lifts and other pieces of the ship that are required for it to function. The radar signatures for each side must be significantly different.

I suppose the CVF’s will be similar and have a good side and a bad side.

It would be a nice start point but I don’t think there is anything left in the kitty to support that.
I think Ocean will have to soldier on with Ark Royal having her life extended to act as a second commando carrier.

I do like the Cavour, it would make a good design starting point for when the RN decide to replace Ocean. 😎

Is it just me, but she appears to be a ship with two faces. The port side is very smooth and photogenic, but the starboard side is just pug ugly with all those ramps, lifts and other pieces of the ship that are required for it to function. The radar signatures for each side must be significantly different.

I suppose the CVF’s will be similar and have a good side and a bad side.

Our baby aircraft carrier grow up again?

Stop with Pizza and Pasta 😀

Our baby aircraft carrier grow up again?

During the development of the displacement of the project grow up from 15,000 to 27,100 tons full load of final project on 2000.
The official full load displacement is 27,100 tons but last month Fincantieri website, the builder, and one defense magazine report 27,500 tons and today my friend find Orizzonte website, the alliance between Fincantieri (builder) and Finmeccanica (system) for italian naval project, that report 27,910 tons!!! 😀

Cavour grow up 810 tons on 1 month 🙂 now we waiting the 30,000 tons for the ceremony of delivery of combat flag scheduled for april 2009 :p

Now we don’t know which displacement is correct
– from Italian Navy?
– from Builder?
– from naval alliance?

I’m impressed. 😀 Have you not heard the saying “when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”?

Look who’s talking

Yeah, whatever.

I’m impressed. 😀 Have you not heard the saying “when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”?

“Get a life”? Err – who started nitpicking, by listing rather a lot of islands? At least I nitpick accurately. :p

Yeah, whatever.

Get a life, will ya, you’re the one who started nitpicking about the med not being an ocean etc. (which was besides the point anyhow)

“Get a life”? Err – who started nitpicking, by listing rather a lot of islands? At least I nitpick accurately. :p

If you wish to debate the correctness or otherwise of that statement, I suggest you do so with its originator. As I’ve already said, it’s nothing to do with me. I’m not going to speculate on the thought processes which led to it.

BTW, the entire Med can’t be covered by land-based fighters from Italy. You’re conflating my comment, that the islands you had named could all be covered by aircraft from the Italian mainland, with enrr’s original statement, which was not referring to those islands.

You appear to be trying to provoke an argument, but I can’t see that there’s anything to argue about. The British decision to build the Invincible class was driven by different factors, in a different time. It wasn’t designed as an aircraft carrier, but an anti-submarine helicopter carrier, for fighting the Soviet navy in the North Atlantic. Ascension (raised by you, again) was not expected to need defending by aircraft carriers – and still isn’t. The Invincibles aren’t relevant to a discussion of Cavour, & the requirements driving its design. It should more properly be compared with Charles de Gaulle, or the future Queen Elizabeth class.

I won’t participate further in this discussion. If you want to argue with enrr over his remark, please don’t do so by replying to my posts.

Get a life, will ya, you’re the one who started nitpicking about the med not being an ocean etc. (which was besides the point anyhow)

“Italy haven’t isle in the middle of ocean, Cavour is a good ship for Mediterranean operation”

So what does this remark mean? Whether or not the med is an ocean is irrelevant. If the point is that the entire ‘small’ Med can be covered by landbased aircraft, then Italy wouldn’t need Cavour and Garibaldi. Nonetheless they have these ships. The UK has Ascension, yet they also have Invincible class. It’s a bs remark.

If you wish to debate the correctness or otherwise of that statement, I suggest you do so with its originator. As I’ve already said, it’s nothing to do with me. I’m not going to speculate on the thought processes which led to it.

BTW, the entire Med can’t be covered by land-based fighters from Italy. You’re conflating my comment, that the islands you had named could all be covered by aircraft from the Italian mainland, with enrr’s original statement, which was not referring to those islands.

You appear to be trying to provoke an argument, but I can’t see that there’s anything to argue about. The British decision to build the Invincible class was driven by different factors, in a different time. It wasn’t designed as an aircraft carrier, but an anti-submarine helicopter carrier, for fighting the Soviet navy in the North Atlantic. Ascension (raised by you, again) was not expected to need defending by aircraft carriers – and still isn’t. The Invincibles aren’t relevant to a discussion of Cavour, & the requirements driving its design. It should more properly be compared with Charles de Gaulle, or the future Queen Elizabeth class.

I won’t participate further in this discussion. If you want to argue with enrr over his remark, please don’t do so by replying to my posts.

Not my remark. This exchange began with –

You responded with –

None of them are in the middle of an ocean. The Mediterranean isn’t an ocean, by either the original or current (only slightly different) meaning of that word. Ascension is an oceanic island. Also the Azores, Hawaii, La Reunion. I was correcting your erroneous “correction” of enrr. A linguistic problem?

“Italy haven’t isle in the middle of ocean, Cavour is a good ship for Mediterranean operation”

So what does this remark mean? Whether or not the med is an ocean is irrelevant. If the point is that the entire ‘small’ Med can be covered by landbased aircraft, then Italy wouldn’t need Cavour and Garibaldi. Nonetheless they have these ships. The UK has Ascension, yet they also have Invincible class. It’s a bs remark.

Excuse me but isn’t the whole of Italy located smack in the middle of the narrow confines of the Mediterranean? So wouldn’t any Italian island be? Pantelleria is 2/3 of the way from Sicily to Tunisia, about the same distance from Sicily as Malta is. Any spot in the med is pretty much in range of landbased aviation, so what was youyr islan remark about to begin with? What sort of Island were you referring to then? An island in the Atlantic, like Ascension island? What , if anything, does that have to do with the Cavour?

Not my remark. This exchange began with –

…Italy haven’t isle in the middle of ocean, Cavour is a good ship for Mediterranean operation.

You responded with –

Pantelleria? The Pelagie Islands? The Aeolian Islands? The Tuscan Archipelago? The Ponza Islands? The Tremiti Islands? … Sicily?

None of them are in the middle of an ocean. The Mediterranean isn’t an ocean, by either the original or current (only slightly different) meaning of that word. Ascension is an oceanic island. Also the Azores, Hawaii, La Reunion. I was correcting your erroneous “correction” of enrr. A linguistic problem?

All in the narrow confines of the Mediterranean Sea, all easily within range of land-based aircraft. Some are within sight of the mainland, and there’s a plan to build a bridge connecting Sicily to Calabria. Not exactly “in the middle of the ocean”, which doesn’t just mean surrounded by seawater, but remote, far from large land masses.

Excuse me but isn’t the whole of Italy located smack in the middle of the narrow confines of the Mediterranean? So wouldn’t any Italian island be? Pantelleria is 2/3 of the way from Sicily to Tunisia, about the same distance from Sicily as Malta is. Any spot in the med is pretty much in range of landbased aviation, so what was youyr islan remark about to begin with? What sort of Island were you referring to then? An island in the Atlantic, like Ascension island? What , if anything, does that have to do with the Cavour?

Cavour has a single hangar that can be host 24 MBT, it hasn’t a vehicle deck.

MBT must use the 60 tons side ramp or aft ramp because the deck-edge lift can carry only 30 tons

As one can see from the above photo, the side lifts of the Cavour serve a hangar deck well, but would have to drop further, probably below sea level, to serve a vehicle deck that the Juan Carlos BPE serves. The reason why the Juan Carlos has a aft lift within a shortened flight deck, to serve the vehicle deck of the BPE too.