Worth remembering there are limits to what can usefully be accomodated in a hull of given size. A vessel is a compromise between speed, endurance, sea keeping qualities and stability, fire power and sensor fit, the problem with a lot of the ideas for high capability corvettes is they overload the hull, leave zero room for future growth and end up almost as expensive as a larger frigate offering much better long term capabilities. Somebody say Sa’ar V.

I would take issue with the concept of buying an overly large, underarmed “platform” in hopes of acquiring additional weapons and sensor at a later date – the infamous “mid-life update,” which never seems to materialize in full.

In most cases, there is little point in “leaving room for future growth” because it is rare to see truly substantial – and expensive – upgrades.

The modular approach to capabilities only works if there is the money and will to purchase the applicable modules.

The problem is UK yards unlike ones in other countries (France, Germany and Spain for example) don’t get orders for large civilian ships like container ships, cruise liners and tankers.

With the trickle of millitary orders its hardly surprising that UK yards are not competative.

US shipyards haven’t seen substantial civilian orders since the Reagan era – lets avoid the “Project America” for the sake of discussion.

American shipyards might not be “commercially” viable, but building schedules and costs for military funded projects haven’t been altogether unreasonable.

Swann Hunter are more than capable of making Frigates and small vessels but the ALSL order was just too much. I have a hunch that if Swann Hunter had been recieving regular orders for Ferries and cargo ships over the last thirty years the ALSL order would of presented few problems for them and easily come in under budget.

With under investment, lack of government support and unions not realising the consequences of their actions its hardly surprising that British ship building is in ruins.

Indeed, Swan Hunter would have been more than capable of finishing both ALSL units on time, and under budget, if there had a been a steady stream of work from 1993 onward.

We all know that the reality was far different.

Well, the US would be happy to build the CVF’s or any Carrier in the US for UK. Yet, I don’t see any practical reason for such a move? Further, look at the thousands of jobs that would be lost!

The practical reason is that the UK’s shipbuilding industry has already declined to point where costs and delays are literally killing defense programs. If the British shipbuilding industry has failed to the Type 45 and Astute programs on time and under budget, is there any reason to believe that the CV-F program will be any different?

The United States has maintained a far more capable shipbuilding sector than the UK. The United States Navy is also set to become the biggest customer for the Rolls Royce MT-30 gas turbine.

What is the likelyhood of a ‘Western’ nation (UK, US, EU including Australia and New Zealand) ever being able to purchase a Russian aircraft for their AirForces?

I don’t just mean the modern fighters but also transport aircraft and helicopters.

With several nations actively seeking replacements for aircraft purchased in the 70s and 80s is the purchasing of Russian aircraft a realistic option for these countries, will Vladimir Putin allow MiG, Sukhoi etc to sell their wares to them?

Or does America have such a strong grip on Western airforce equipment?

Perhaps Russian export horizons will broaden, but recent events in London cast doubt upon Russia’s future. Russia could potentially gain a toehold in defense exports to Western countries, but it is also possible that Russia could face sanctions and embargoes.

Call to remodel Eurofighter alliance
By James Boxell, Defence Industries Correspondent

Sir Peter Spencer, head of the MoD’s procurement organisation, blamed the delay on the refusal of the Eurofighter consortium to provide aircraft to test the missiles at an affordable price.

“We were not prepared to accept the price,” Sir Peter said. “We are going to turn this charity into a business.”

The MoD will instead test the Meteor missiles on France’s Rafale fighter jet and Sweden’s Gripen.

So the British taxpayer will pay to have the Meteor AAM integrated with the Rafale and Gripen?

With regard to power plant size, it’s hard to see a nuclear power plant being smaller than a gas turbine plant as one of the very real advantages of a gas turbine over alternatives is low size and power/weight ratio. True new generation nuclear plant is much more efficient, but it still needs the primary/secondary heat exchangers, steam turbines and associated plant and probably either gearboxes or electric transmission.

It is easy to get data on gas turbines, but there is very little public information on military marine nuclear reactors. So, how do you establish a baseline comparision?

On the other hand, it is not unreasonable to expect that a nuclear powerplant can fit into an oversized 14,000+ ton hull.

The real issue is cost.

The USN built 3 separate, singleton, one-off nuclear powered cruisers and then built a total of 6 series production nuclear propelled cruisers. The USN had been correct to approach nuclear propulsion with such great caution in the 1960s, was correct again to halt production at the end of the 1970s, and was correct again when the last of the nuclear powered cruisers was retired early in the mid-90s.

In all likelihood, nuclear power for surface combatants was just as uneconomic in 1980 as it was in 1960, and remains unaffordable today.

Don’t see too many shots of the crane. Looks like they’re having fun :p

It is amazing that this crane took the place of only 3 VLS cells.

In the high threat environment of the cold war, reloading at sea must have seemed to be a valuable capability.

It reminds me of the early claims that gas turbine powered destroyers could literally swap out turbines in the middle of the open ocean.

which will make it the biggest carrier after the us super carriers.

Did you forget about Kuznetsov and ex-Varyag?

These Soviet-era 65,000 ton carriers are a great deal longer than CV-F, although the overload French variant is expected to have a significantly larger displacement.