Any idea how in y2010 dollars/pounds the flattops compare to buy, then to operate?

Fairly sure a QE is ~$4 Billion, Nimitz is $8+ billion. Ford is even more expensive.

Due to additional aircraft and much higher crewing requirements Nimitz would likely cost much more to operate per year then QE. I’d wouldn’t be surprised if it cost 3 or 4 times as much per year.

Maybe the larger crew is beacuse the US carriers normally deploy for longer, with a much bigger airwing(than any other navy in the world) and most importantly have to keep that airwing combat ready 24/7 as they are almost always in operational theatres carrying out combat missions or could be deployed if needed.Im not saying that other nations carriers are not in operational theatres also but it would obviously take a much bigger crew to keep 60-70 military aircraft on an US carrier operational than say 20-25 onboard the CdG and when you think about it the crew size doesnt seem to be too unproportional.CdG=1950 crew to keep 25aircraft flying compared to 5000 crew to keep 70 aircraft flying.

Doesnt work like that.

De Gaule
Complement:
Ship’s company: 1,350
Air wing: 600
Aircraft: ~30

600/30=20 Aircrew/Aircraft

QE Class
Complement: 600
Aircrew: Up to 900
Aircraft: 40

900/40=22.5 Aircrew/Aircraft

Nimitz
Ship’s company: 3,200
Air wing: 2,480
Aircraft: Wiki give 85-90, Its Currently ~70 though….

2480/90=27.5 Aircrew/Aicraft
2480/70=35.42 Aircrew/Aircraft

So aircrew is *fairly* similar. However compare the Size of the ships complement though, while remembering that QE is >2/3 the size of Nimitz.

Whats wrong with 2 islands. Their properly placed for their respective jobs and are perfect for the gas turbine placement. How would you have placed them and routed the exhausts and air intakes and mounted the radars ect so they don’t interfer with each other. Look at how much deck space is taken up on the invincibles doing the same job.

Yup, I think its quite elegent. Keeps the GT’s high up in the hull to minimise the amount of space taken up by piping, plus probably makes them easier to remover and replace.

The two islands allows them to follow the “unit” arrangment with propulsion with the GT’s far enough apart that a single hit cannot take out both engine rooms.

Whoever thought that up deserves a drink or two.

Didn’t Illustrious or Ocean lose a towing vehicle off the side of the carrier and have a merlin pretty much hanging over the water on the edge of the flight deck? Last year or the year before, in the vicinity of Suez from memory?

There is the use of radar blockers in the nozzle for one, and secondly exactly how many angles would a radar be able to view directly inside that nozzle? At most, there’s a limited cone that would be vulnerable.

Whats a radar blocker? You mean an S-bend?

Wouldn’t that be best described as a radar redirector?

Reliance on US probably false

Provisional Data for frigate type 26:
– 141m long

– Displacement: 6850 tons

– It is also anticipated that the Type 26 will have an ether all electric or hybrid electric propulsion system providing a range of 7000nm at 18 knots. The ships compliment is expected to be in the range of 150 plus an embarked force of over 30.

– Main gun option: refurbished 114mm weapon (in case of heavy budgets cuts/limits :D;)) or 127mm (US or more likely the new italian 5″ mount) or 155mm (BAE systems mount)

– Equipped with a towed low frequency sonar array and two launchers (2×16 ?) for the Future Local Area Air Defence (Maritime) system firing the Common Anti Air Modular Missile (PAAMS ?, aster 15 ?), maybe 32 VLS ?

– Other options include a vertical launch system for Tomahawk, SCALP or a modified GMLRS

– CIWS: Use of Phalanx by 2020 is not a great option….maybe the RAM ?

– Aviation facilities include a “Chinook” flight deck and hangar for a Merlin and UAV, the UAV possibly housed in a supplementary ‘dog kennel’ hangar.

– Beneath the flight deck will be a large mission bay and stern dock to hold 4 9m RHIB’s, a torpedo system and a wide variety of mission modules.

– It is being termed the ‘Combat Ship’ and likely to be the larger of the Future Surface Combatant, so the C1/C2 concept seems to be still alive.

– Unit cost: Unknow, demand to martian 😀 but probably around the cost of 4-5 F-35B :D:rolleyes::dev2:

– Quantity 😀 between 2 and 12 😀

Err, I was talking about problems with the RAN buying it, not the RN. And it sounds like 16 VLS cells with 64 CAMM, Aster wont be fitted.

Lots of planes can run down an F-111 when it’s low level. They overtake it at altutide and shoot the fish in the barrel. An F-111 at altitude is another matter. An F-111F can reach Mach 2.5 but even at Mach 2 it’s going to take a Typhoon a LONG time (if ever) to reel that sucker in in a tail chase and an F-111 has a lot of fuel.

And again, if you are in a tail chase with an F-111 you have already lost since its likely that its already dropped its ordinance.