New Aircraft Carrier

Home Forum Chat Forum New Aircraft Carrier

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 142 total)
  • New Aircraft Carrier
  • ehrob
    Member

    Yep just left Rosyth according to MarineTraffic.

    Don’t know where she’ll be anchoring before going under the bridges.

    legend
    Member

    Might just be held by the tugs instead of anchoring

    piemonster
    Member

    Isn’t it going through at low tide, which is around 10:30 tonight?

    Premier Icon franksinatra
    Subscriber

    I hope they have the calculations right, I see the margins are tiny and it would b very embarrassing to get it wrong!

    jamesy01
    Member

    2330 according to FRB’s twitter
    tweet

    yetidave
    Member

    hope they have done their sums right – anyone remember the oil rig/Erskine bridge incident?

    Premier Icon kennyp
    Subscriber

    I gather she is just leaving dock as I type this. Anyone around the area able to confirm? We are planning to head out to South Queensferry later to hopefully catch her going under the bridges. Though I think low tide isn’t till about ten this evening.

    hammyuk
    Member

    It’s BAE.
    Of course they ha……………

    fergal
    Member

    What is it going to be used for, White elephant surely? the empire is long gone.

    legend
    Member

    It’ll be used for sailing around the world keeping people employed obvs

    falkirk-mark
    Member

    hope they have done their sums right – anyone remember the oil rig/Erskine bridge incident?

    We were talking about that this morning in work I think it was the Dunbar and it was a total rig (one of the guys here was an operator on it). Came from UIE in Clydebank

    fergal
    Member

    Rather expensive vanity project… oh yeah projecting Bitish power and influence, what a farce.

    CountZero
    Member

    What is it going to be used for, White elephant surely? the empire is long gone.

    Well, Putin has one.

    Rather expensive vanity project… oh yeah projecting Bitish power and influence, what a farce.

    Perhaps you’d like to have a word with other countries with larger navies than we have and make that point, see just exactly how far you get… πŸ™„

    Do we have any planes to put on it?

    legend
    Member

    It’s an aircraft carrier, not a plane carrier – noob πŸ™„

    fergal
    Member

    So what if Putin has one? it’s a floating wreck and could be taken out with a single missile, the states has dozens, the Nimitz is a great bit of kit i’m sure, the fan boys will be creaming thier pants, having this capability only leads to more conflict.

    This isn’t Brittania rules the waves anymore, big ships are obsolete anyway.

    CountZero
    Member

    Right, these are the number of carriers that other countries have:
    USA – 19
    France – 4
    Japan – 4
    India – 3
    Spain – 2
    Italy – 2
    Australia – 2
    Egypt – 2
    Thailand – 1
    South Korea – 1
    China – 1
    Russia – 1
    Rather expensive vanity project… oh yeah projecting American/French/Japanese/Indian/Spanish/Italian/Australian/Egyptian/Thai/S.Korean/Chinese/Russian power and influence, what a farce.
    πŸ™„
    http://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-aircraft-carriers.asp

    Premier Icon matt_outandabout
    Subscriber

    She’s a big new girl…

    hammyuk
    Member

    She’s still a baby in comparison to the US ones.
    Ones we could’ve bought for a lot, lot, lot less money too…..

    project
    Member

    the picture avove shows it has a huuuuuuge red penis, that should scare the russians

    Premier Icon budgierider67
    Subscriber

    The USA and France are still the only countries with proper carriers with the aircraft to project their power from distance.

    fergal
    Member

    So what is it you are trying to say, our nearest neighbours are european and friendly, that list of Navies with carriers is pointless, are you saying they are hostile.

    The fact that the establishment creats a hypothesis for the need of these warships doesn’t mean they are needed.

    It’s pretty obvious the political descision to build these two carriers was based on job creation, it doesn’t change the fact that they are White elephants.

    We saw the damage a few exocet missiles could do to the British navy during the Falklands war.

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    She’s still a baby in comparison to the US ones.
    Ones we could’ve bought for a lot, lot, lot less money too…..

    Wiki says the latest US show pony the USS Gerald R. Ford which gets commissioned next month is 100,000 tonnes and cost $12.7bn + $4.7bn R&D whilst the Queen Elizabeth is 70,000 and cost Β£3.1BN (Β£6.2bn for the pair).

    It’s a bit smaller (US craft 50m longer but pretty much identical beam) but a lot, lot cheaper. I’d be amazed if the yanks would have sold us a cast off for less than we spent once you took a refit into account. We’d also have struggled to park/service it in a UK port.

    Whilst I’m first in the queue to bin trident I can still see the point in an aircraft carrier even for a tinpot nation such as the UK.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    project – Member
    the picture avove shows it has a huuuuuuge red penis, that should scare the russians

    πŸ˜†

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    CountZero – Member
    Right, these are the number of carriers that other countries have:
    USA – 19
    France – 4
    Japan – 4
    India – 3
    Spain – 2
    Italy – 2
    Australia – 2
    Egypt – 2
    Thailand – 1
    South Korea – 1
    China – 1
    Russia – 1
    Rather expensive vanity project… oh yeah projecting American/French/Japanese/Indian/Spanish/Italian/Australian/Egyptian/Thai/S.Korean/Chinese/Russian power and influence, what a farce.

    When’s the war starting against, any of them? πŸ˜†

    ninfan
    Member

    When’s the war starting against, any of them?

    30th March 2019

    hammyuk
    Member

    Convert – it was open knowledge in the port where they are going to live – BAE were laughing all the way to the bank.
    The MoD refused to go with the financial cleverness and demanded their own design instead of an existing barebones one that would then be fitted to our spec here – by BAE strangely enough….

    Oh – those figures for the QE class are somewhat short of the true amount by the time she gets handed over.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    ninfan – Member
    When’s the war starting against, any of them?
    30th March 2019

    πŸ˜†

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    Oh – those figures for the QE class are somewhat short of the true amount by the time she gets handed over.

    Really? got a source for that? I thought the Β£6.2bn was the new inflated cost of a project that started at Β£3bn. Not saying it could not have been cheaper had different decisions been made, just pointing out the US variant was not cheap by comparison.

    bencooper
    Member

    The Navy wonk on the BBC even said that the big advantage of an aircraft carrier is it’s big and everyone can see it unlike a submarine.

    It’s the perfect bauble for an all-fur-coat-and-no-knickers country.

    chewkw
    Member

    No aircraft carrier then you get hammered.

    There is nothing you can do about that … πŸ˜›

    What are you going to do? Argue? πŸ˜†

    wilburt
    Member

    How does an aircraft carrier defend my house?

    mrlebowski
    Member

    You are aware of torpedoes chewkw?

    & the reason one hasn’t been sunk is that nobody (the US) haven’t picked a fight with anyone who has a credible submarine threat.

    It’s a bit bloody obvious..

    They are great if you want to go & wallop the fuzzy wuzzies, but a bit sh1t if the other side has umpteen Akula class subs….

    wilburt
    Member

    CountZero – Member
    Right, these are the number of carriers that other countries have:
    USA – 19
    France – 4
    Japan – 4
    India – 3
    Spain – 2
    Italy – 2
    Australia – 2
    Egypt – 2
    Thailand – 1
    South Korea – 1
    China – 1
    Russia – 1
    Rather expensive vanity project… oh yeah projecting American/French/Japanese/Indian/Spanish/Italian/Australian/Egyptian/Thai/S.Korean/Chinese/Russian power and influence, what a farce.

    http://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-aircraft-carriers.asp

    I dont know how residents of the other 190 countries can sleep at night.

    Maybe we should form some kind of consortium with other nearby countries and share the cost of defending our values? Just a thought.

    PJM1974
    Member

    There’s carriers and there’s carriers. Catapult and wire (CATOBAR) carriers are only fielded by the US, France and bizarrely Brazil, everyone else uses some sort of Short Take Off arrangement with a ramp and arrestir wires or vertical landing,

    Our carriers, are basically big helicopter carriers and can’t field mini-AWACS aircraft, so will have to make do with altitude limited Merlin choppers with a bolt on radar. We can’t launch Hawkeye type aircraft which severely limits the range that our ships can detect incoming missiles or hostile aircraft.

    The F35B is very expensive, can’t carry much and isn’t a dog fighter. We should have bought off the shelf catapults, traps, Hawkeyes and Rafales/F-18Es.

    They’re a typical British lash-up, an expensive one at that.

    graemecsl
    Member

    We’re going to need something for the coming cod wars.

    I’m glad we’ve got it, we’ve always been a naval power and have had our asses saved by that fact on a fair few occasions.

    It’s all very well being high minded lefty liberal intelligentsia, but the rest of the world aint, there are still all manner of threats and although we may walk softly we still need to carry a big stick.

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    Walloping fuzzy wuzzies* is pretty much the only kind of old school warfare we are ever going to get involved in if we have any sense.

    *assuming walloping fuzzy wuzzies includes the 21st century equivalent of the Argentinians nabbing their Malvinas isles back or getting involved in conflicts such as the Bosnian war.

    chewkw
    Member

    wilburt – Member
    How does an aircraft carrier defend my house?

    If there was a successful invading force what is the use of your house when you no longer live there? See … see … πŸ˜† You could be put to hard labour.

    mrlebowski – Member
    You are aware of torpedoes chewkw?

    Before you launch your torpedoes you need to get closer first … πŸ˜†

    If you can get close enough to launch your torpedoes then you deserve the kill, otherwise play with the hunter killer first.

    & the reason one hasn’t been sunk is that nobody (the US) haven’t picked a fight with anyone who has a credible submarine threat.

    There you go the reality set in. They simply do not have the technology nor the ability to fight hence they are losers. Simple.

    It’s a bit bloody obvious..

    Hence, the more aircraft carriers you have the more you can hammer everyone around.

    They are great if you want to go & wallop the fuzzy wuzzies, but a bit sh1t if the other side has umpteen Akula class subs….

    I am sure you can afford subs too if you have aircraft carrier(s). πŸ˜›

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 142 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.