The DocSea Phoon = great idea for whitehall. Spend as long to develope it as they did developing the Typhoon and as much of the defence budget as possible to make it sound really good, whilst not spending on the correct PPE for the squaddies, then cancel it when CVF going to retire around 2050, & say with hinesight should’ve kept SHAR as it was best thing in the ‘olden days’.
The Doc[QUOTE=Jonesy;1372357]Just a brief, off topic, mental meandering but why is ‘Chinaman’ considered derogatory when ‘Frenchman’ or ‘Englishman’ would not be?.
Maybe an inferiority complex, or jealousy as China has a longer history and were civilized when Jock, Paddy, Taff & our English cousins were running around like a bunch of ignorant savages.
Question, What do Chinamen (men = Homo sapiens not as evolutionists would infer as a sub human species, & China = nation of origin) have to do with RN fighter aircraft?????
Me thinks they are going to build a couple of carriers, fill them with aircraft, of their own superior design & wipe the Yanks of the face of the earth, just for the hell of it….
The DocObi Wan, many thanks, a gentleman & a scholar. Any thing further on the 1952?
The Doc[QUOTE=Fedaykin;1368933]Playful inter service rivalry is one thing but the petty behaviour of all three services is another thing.
I personally think all three major services are guilty of petty attacks against the other services without realising the real enemy is the treasury (I don’t include the marines here as far as I can see they usually are the victim of this inter service battle).
100% agreement. Maybe time for a change. The 3 services aught to get together, & work out a united policy for defensive & offensive operations. Black buck type operations are still needed with several aircraft involved not a single aircraft, therefore several Vulcan / replacement squadrons should be in service.(US B52 bombings in Afghanistan)
Local air superiority a must for ground operations, whither a commando raid or full armoured division deployment therefore a forward flexible airstrip equals aircraft carrier. Enoch Powell stated in 1943 “no British presence required in Europe (mainland) after defeat of Germany” this has been the biggest waste of precious defense money post’45.
The DocHi Obi. Like the images, keep them coming. If you don’t mind my asking where did you get the profile and plan drawings from, only I’ve been trawling the net for ages looking for them to do something similar to what you’ve done? Also do you have the plan image of Victorious post 1950 without the hanger cutaway or profile on the same scale as your modified drawing?
Lastly to anyone out there where can I find plan drawings line or filled of Phantoms, Gannets, Helos and Buccaneers (both folded and unfolded)?
For drawings, of ships, weapon systems & aircraft, try Shipbucket.
The DocObi Wan, your expert opinion please, Had Victorious been recomissioned then a further refit due mid to late seventies with bow ski-jump like Hermes & waist cat. Possible CAG would be 9 Buccaneers; 12 Sea Harriers; 4 Gannets & 5 ASW Sea Kings. Would she still be mechanically sound enough for service? If the RN top brass decided to surrender both the Ark & Eagle instead & kept Vicky & Hermes (no waist cat due to deck edge lift) would I be correct to assume the loses would’ve been avoidable in the South Atlantic? Do you know the results of the modified nose cone on the 3 1977 buccaneers & what effect would this have on operations in 1982?
PS like the drawings on Ship buckets. Any further info on the 1952 design other than the few lines in ‘Navy Matters’ & Tornados drawing on ‘ship buckets’?
The DocWe are all equal, its just some are more equal than others.
top 3 air forces in the world: 1/ FAA. 2/ Israel 3/ raf.
Best taxi service in the world only 1 that counts any how, always there when need RN.
Percy is 2nd best at what he does as well, not boasting but every one knows who the number 1 is in that dept. though modesty stops me from saying.
Sod PC the real enemy is the gay,left wing liberal anti British establishment which has bitterly divided our armed forces & ruined our country. But thats life!
The DocThoroughly enjoyed the video. Puts a lump in yer throat. All the firsts the RN & FAA achieved & yet the enemy within still tries to destroy the pride of the nation.
The DocIn Scooters pic of the new Aussie naval uniform, Where do the place their stripes? & surely in this day of PC aught she not be wearing fluorescent yellow?
The DocJust wondering, though nothing more, what if?
The yanks went from F18 to super hornet. Why didn’t/couldn’t the RN top brass go for a super SHAR after the Falklands war? I mean larger airframe = medium range missiles, radar etc.
Short fall in SHAR, a mighty winner against allegedly superiors, replaced by P1154 type in size & performance. Though 15-20 year old design it could’ve been updated & still fly of light carriers. Wasn’t the RAF version almost ready to fly when cancelled & turned to p1127?
forget the old argument, money. Would it have been possible or not given the will power?
The DocAny country which conducts it commercial business over the deep blue sea, needs a carrier to protect their interests & free trade. How-ever they are an expensive piece of kit. 99.9% of the time you won’t really need one so the bean counters won’t give you one, then when you really need it their arn’t any and you end up spending more dosh replacing everything you have lost.
It’s the British way of doing things! (commie, socialist, liberal, establishment way to be exact)!!!
The DocCould China have two brand new, home designed carriers at sea by 2015?
Logically speaking the answer is yes they could. They are capable of designing, constructing & deploying such vessels. If NB if, they go ahead will such vessels be any good? Compared with US CVN’s answer no. Will they be able to deploy them effectively, again I must answer no.
Like I’ve stated before China is the biggest (population) country in the world, followed by India, both are now economic superpowers & possibly in their minds now have to be big players militarily also. Carriers are a status symbol therefore if you want to play as one of the big boys you certainly need them.
Until we actually see hulls forming in Chinese shipyards we won’t know for certain if this is all hot air or not. Only time will tell. This is for sure India will have.
Can’t wait until 2015 to see for sure if China can.http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/images/smilies/wink.gif
The DocSince the Chinese have spent years assiduously studying carrier operations, I’m sure they know a hell of a lot about it.
Lets hope they keep studying, & be like HM government, actually do nothing.
The DocThe USA have put more resources into carrier building than any-one else. They build a new 100,000 ton carrier every 7 years or so. China appears to want to construct a 50,000 ton carrier in 6 years. Comparing Audacious class 54,000 when remodeled in the 60’s dimensionally they are 4/5th of that Nimitz class, so theoretically should take 4/5th of the time to complete.
Since the USA has such vast experience they should know that deck-edge lifts cannot be used during extreme weather conditions unlike central line lifts which can. The Chinese since they haven’t built their own won’t know this. Ski jumps can launch more aircraft per minute in all weather conditions than steam catapults, with their superior knowledge of carrier operations the Americans insist on catapults. But then again the Chinese won’t know this cause they haven’t constructed any themselves.
The Submariners of this world have word to describe carriers. It’s “target”.
Though an advocate of the carrier, remember at the end of the day they are only a large metal box for carrying aeroplanes.
In the sea-lanes of the world they are like a police range rover on the motor way. They are there to be seen. They are there to show military muscle.
Sir Robert Thompson KBE CMG DSO MC in describing counter-insurgency says visible troops are there to support civil forces, and be seen to install confidence in law & order. The war is won by superior intelligence directing special forces in elimination of the enemy.
Like wise the carriers are a visible presence to install confidence whilst the aircraft gather intelligence & attack the enemy afar off. Submarines whilst they cannot be seen can deploy special forces against rouge elements unseen as all eyes are on the CVBG’s.
The USA carriers have a planed life of approx. 45 years. replacements come every 7.5 yrs = 9 carriers in the none to distant future. China appears to be capable of constructing 2 every 6 yrs. If this is proved to be correct & unlike the Americans they have learned the lessons well by other peoples mistakes, may be in 18 years from now they will have more operational units the the USA. Chinese carriers will be cheaper & quicker built & possibly a new cold war between China & USA is about to begin, but unlike the Soviets, China might well bankrupt the USA.
Only time will tell.
The Docinteresting debate.
Who is China?
Largest country in the world. Largest land army in the world. emerging economic super power. Needs oil.
Last few years has copied (allegedly) other countries designs & mass produced them.
As a Naval power it lags far behind USA & India & needs to catch up pretty quickly to save face.
today’s status symbol is an aircraft carrier, with STOVL almost every man and his dog has one, even small nations Taiwan, Italy, Spain etc but not China the largest country in the world.
Is it possible for them to build two carriers. They have the design, simply copy what you have & mass produce it. conclusion China’s record shows this she can do.
Will they be of much use? If China went to war & used her (2-3) carriers most likely they will come up against a similar number of US CVN’s. Result China will lose. This therefore is most likely not an option, but rater as a status symbol & nothing more.
look forward to 2020 USA operating at least 10 up to date CVN’s & China 2-3 CV’s of vintage 80’s design & GB with none.
Only time will tell.
Sign In
