It is…….US Navy has more carrier experience than any other navy on Earth…….and they would NEVER split the island………..it is an unnessasary seperation that simply adds to the complexity of the design and makes flight operations that much harder……..There is a reason US, French, and (up to this point) British carriers have only had one island….ITS THE BEST SOLUTION.
TWO islands are a waste……..one is perfectly adequate……..
I would. Whoever wants them will have to buy F-35. So the USA will have much control over who builds them.
Again…..its a horrible waste of valuable flight deck space……
In Indias deffence, she does have two potentialy hostile countries on seperate borders….(China and Pakistan)………And if Pakistan is so spendthrift, why are they aquiring two new fighter types? (F-16C and JF-17)
yES…THE mIGHTY mig-21 lANCER IS THE GREATEST FIGHTER ever!!!!! aLL COUNTRIES THAT HAVEN’T SCRAPPED THEIR FLEETS OF F-16S AND F-15S, AND TYPHOONS, AND MIRAGES ARE DOOMED TO DESTRUCTION BY THE HORDES OF MIG-21 SUPERFIGHTERS!!!!!!!
Most (if not all) North Vietnamese aces flew the MIG-17…………earlier fighter, but much more manuverable and reliable…….
Agree with EVERYTHING phantomII said!!! A 1990s design?! Its a MIG-21 fer cripes sake!!!! MIG-21s NEVER win!
Us Naval aviation has been getting the shaft ever since the A-12 got canned!
When was the last time a carrier was hit by an anti-ship missile? Or even attacked at sea? 1982?
Seems the Brits like taking up valuable deck space with islands……..look at the CVF….TWO of the things!
If the US offered India one of the Forrestals, would India accept? Would be neat to see SU-33s and MIG-29s operating off one of them. But, I suupose they too manpower intensive….
How did Bristol do in the Falklands?
Would Brazil be interested in buying/leasing surplus F-18As?
I think Australia learned a harsh lesson when they took those 2 LSTs from the US Navy……….what junk we gave them.