In my opinion , why would you place the kutz in this catagory , she is a 60,000 full load and must be with the heavy weights!!!

Welcome mate, I put Kutz in this mainly because she is a carrier, funny that ey mate 😉

The basic problem with the Chakri Naruebet – is the Thais , do not know where to fit her in the ovrall fabric of their Navy – with their level , they are having a problem running a carrier in terms of logistics and manning her .

The intent to buy a vessel is good, but you really have to have a need for it. Personally if I were the CiC of the Thai Navy, the first thing I’d do is remodel the carrier and get rid of the wasted Royal Suite, why have it when it’s never going to be used?

Kuznetsov wins easily, and by a relatively massive margin, if you take away aircraft and escorts. How many other carriers have nuclear-armed anti-ship missiles?

Well according to Mix, Sean, the Yanks have some and I am sure the French do as well!

Placing the bridge in the bow of the carrier would be very unpopular, and not a great design.

So why has there been many designs with this feature?

The bow of the ship is not normally ballasted, quite the opposite

Another reason to add the bridge there and fill up the gap, anyway the ballast I was refering to was in the lower part of the bow, where I have actually seen it.

the higher the bow is, the healthier the takeoff, because it effectively increases the angle of attack of the aircraft’s wings.

This fact is not in dispute, infact a 12* ski jump allows a bridge to be inserted with a nice thick layer of noise supression added in for good measure!

The better solution is to minimise what is actually put in the island, and therefore reduce the space it takes up.

Yeah, kick the officers out of flag country, and put them one deck down that way if the ship gets hit, the first ones out won’t be them but the real people 😉

A lot of the existing radars can now be replaced with one or two phased array radars, electronically steered, which are a lot more reliable and powerful.

Like the ones being developed and used on the Horizon ships?

All of this allows the size of the island to be reduced, the only problem in conventional carriers is then the exhaust – it is damaging for the aircraft and radars, in some cases practically sandblasting the aircraft!

Why not exhaust them in the water like water jets? Our current patrol boats do this and it’s said to increase the speed another 5-15kts, though a carrier would make a different case due to the mass involved, but still the technology is there to exhaust it elsewhere! Why not out to the side and down like the Japanese Carrier Shinano of WWII?

Does any carrier still posses a naval gun? Sao Paulo perhaps having a 5′ gun?

Who all are planning/making them??

I know Boeing Vertol have something in the wind mate, they did have a design many years ago that was like a Chinook crossed with a Skycrane (HLH, look it up). But they have something new now, I’ve only heard about it. Sikorsky put a lot of faith into the S-92 Superhawk, sadly no one else has.

Are these missiles disabled.. look at their electrical connections

When in port and having public open days they disconect them, part of OH&S. Every ship in every navy does this, well for the most part that I’ve seen.