The issue was with you somehow deciding the US navy ships are “real carriers” and the QE class won’t be, not the effectiveness of each design to its own nation.

I dont know what YOU were reading. But US Navy CVs were first brought up by CVF fanboys such as yourself. I used the 😀 emotacon to make a little fun of a fine model. And I did have a feeling that the merest HINT of criticism against the sacred CVF would bring the bloodhounds running!:diablo: Feel foolish yet? And yes, the USN uses “real carriers”. They are not frigates, are they?

I was disappointed when the French Navy caned the 2 seater……..but that may still make a comeback. I really like the Rafale and I hope they win the Indian comp….Typh just isnt what India needs right now IMO, too much of an AtA ride and not enough of a mud mover. Two sticking points I would foresee with a Brit purchase: 1) The Brits love to mess up a good A/C purchase by throwing requirements in that are just out of left field, like different engines. (I could see them insisting on the EJ200 for “commonolity” with the Typh) 2) the SH is substantialy cheaper than Rafale right now (something like 56mil flyaway for a SH to 88mil for Rafale) but I guess that could be brought down in contract negotations. Would either company be willing to open an assembly line in UK? Also….not a big problem, but I think the Rafale would have to get AIM-120 unless RNRAF wants to adopt MICA.

It would be neat to see a “700” series sqdrn stand up in the US with Goshawks for training. A/C could be pooled with on of the USN units……would probably never happen, but neat to think about.

It would be interesting to see what stance the British Gov. would take if this was to happen. After all the money they have invested in the F-35 project so far. If Washington basically said we are cutting out any end product that you would be interested in, would the UK demand their money back? Or would they expect to receive an alternative product? Or would they be forced to buy the A models which they don’t really need?

i would be interesting, thats for sure! Somehow I doubt it would be the “end of the world” scenario that some predict tho…….

Perfect for US Navy requirements.

YES!!!! Thats what I’m trying to point out! The US Navy has different requirements, but the CVF fanboys here are so rabid in ANY percieved slight at the “QE” that one cant point out the obvious. So once again I AM NOT PUTTING THE CVF DESIGN DOWN!!!!!!!! It is what the Royal Navy wants and was designed for their national requirements. However it would not go in the US Navy (and apparently the French Navy either) because we do not require multipurpose ships like that.

Originally Posted by 19kilo10
Wow!!!! Add three cats, lose that front island and it would be a real carrier!
So I wonder what the ships would have been called if they had ski jumps and F35Bs on them? LHAs?
As I understood it the USMC wanted CVF size vessels for their F35Bs the USN did not like this idea and refused to support the proposal.

Over reach by the Marines. That would have threatened the money for the CVNs and the Navy brass simply cant have that.

So the only countries that have built proper aircraft carriers are the US then? All others were a compromise?

She is what the Brits want her to be. I dont see what ur problem is here. The design would never fly in the US Navy because we basically use single purpose ships, so a CVN is a CVN and thats pretty much all it does, an LHA is used as an LHA etc…… for now, we can afford to do that. CVF will be/is able to, and be expected to, accomplish multiple tasks, as she has been designed to do. Thus her design is a compromise of differing requirements that the USN would not accept because they dont have to.

real carrier? what do you consider it at present? 😮

A hybrid/compromise. Not to put it down, but thats what it is.