What you don’t want in any floaty thing is ‘free surface’.

I don’t think the risk of free surface effects is likely to be the, or even a, main consideration. If you’ve got significant quantities of water that high up, you’re already sinking. Compare to ferries and large ROROs. Airframes in the hangar aren’t going to impact on free surface – it’s still free flowing around them. Packing a car deck on a ferry with cars doesn’t make it any safer.

I’d say two reasons:

1) Structural – you need to support the flight deck and a single thickness of hull at the sides is insufficient for that. Compare to a container ship – they don’t pack containers right up to the ship’s outer hull, there’s a set of void or other spaces along the whole of the side. You either have compartments along the side of the hangar or webs or pillars somewhere down the middle. The latter will create obstructions that you really don’t want in there.

2) What Al. said about trunking, stairs, lifts, plus workshops, offices, etc. that you want immediately adjacent to the aircraft maintenance space.

* note number of ‘l’s before making smart ar$ed comments

LOL! :p

From other news items with more information, it will not be a newbuild but rather a bareboat charter of an existing vessel.

The Bay isnt available until 2012 from memory, Ark Royal should be available sometime in the next few months.

If the decision to sell it is made (if it has, it hasn’t been announced yet) the Bay (Largs Bay) is available immediately.

I recommend a time-charter with RFA crew. 😉

Wrong. 3 LCU MK9 are (or have been until relatively recently if they have been retired without me hearing it, it is not easy to keep updated on this “un-fancy” kit that the internet snubs…) in service with the RLC. They are the “smaller Landing Craft Logisitc” that the British Army site mentions but does not describe. ideal world, the navy would have kept 4 old but serviceable LCU MK9 to use on the LSD(A), where the fact that they are not Ro-Ro is no problem since only one LCU is docked inside the ship, so no need to drive through the first in line to load the following craft. Can’t honestly say if this is true or if b

[snip]

Pennant number of the LCU MK9 in RLC service: 701, 705, 709.

What is your source for that? (Got a URL for the mention on the Army website?) I have *never* seen RLC operated LCU Mk9. I’ve been to Marchwood more than a few times. They used to have Landing Craft Logistic (LCL), which were quite large and more like small LSTs and they had Ramped Powered Lighters (RPL) which were somewhere between RCL and LCVP in size.

I have seen LCU Mk9 undergoing work in the boatyard at Portland in the last few years, but those could have been the last remaining RM examples.

They certainly COULD, but even the Type 45 has got the Hangar for a Merlin but is (for now) fully cleared only with Lynx for operations, even if a Merlin was shown on the deck for the first entrance in Portsmouth.

Regular visiting Merlin ops depends on whether Daring (or a sister) has conducted first of class flying trials for Merlin and has a set of SHOLs, Letters of Release, etc.

The same Type 23, they could all carry Merlins, but just a number of them are cleared for Merlin ops.
It is not so automatic.

I’d say it’s a matter of being fitted for embarked Merlin rather than “cleared”. Ancillaries, spares, etc. Stick a TAS, a tractor, some workshops, tools and spares on a Bay and it is fitted for embarked Lynx operations but otherwise is not capable.

After all, the Type 45 is not cleared to embark Sea King.
The only platform which will remain will be HMS Ocean eventually, or HMS Illustrious…
Left without platforms, the Sea King ASaC will be an easy target for deletion.

AOR, AFSH, Argus, (Waves?).

Also, i’m thinking that the power of the propulsion system will be insufficient to power the ship and run the catapults as well.
The CVF is not exactly overpowered, with speed projected to be just over 26 knots.

Most sources seem to quote 25knots maximum sustained speed.

(Caveat: I’m not an engineer)

Installed generating capacity = 108MW
Installed propulsion = 80MW

Giving 28MW for hotel, weapons, sensors, catapult etc. power demands, at full speed with all generators available.

The limitation on speed is the motors, not the generating capacity, so if you want CVF to go faster, you will need to install more capable motors.

IME the maximum sustained speed of modern IEP ships is limited below maximum theoretical by cooling of the propulsion system, certainly in moderately warm waters.