Aircraft Carriers III

Jura said:

from what I figured, the problem was there was plenty of VIPs and journalists on board at the time the glitch occurred ...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

you can check also this:

in:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

Yes...I know. I have seen them.

But that, to me, ...

Click to expand...

Jura said:

... and to me it's amazing what kind of "manager" took VIPs and journalists on the ship in the beginning of the testing process of a brand-new technology ... but I'm not going to "second-guess" or nothing, leaving this topic

Click to expand...

delft said:

A bit of history. In the 17th and 18th century Amsterdam was one of the prime ports in Europe but its access to the sea was obstructed with by dry places, i.e. places with to little water to float the ships wanting to enter or leave. That problem was eventually solved first by a long canal going North from Amsterdam to Den Helder and eventually by a canal going West. Until that time ships loaded and unloaded much of their cargo into and out of lighters near the island Texel. When they were still too deep they were lifted up by constructions called camels. Each camel was a pair of floats connected by beams at the bottom and shaped to fit approximately around the hull of the ship. After being placed in position they were pumped dry and so lifted the ship several feet. Their sailing capability was of course impaired and they were then pulled by a large number, up to about a dozen, fishing vessels called "waterschepen". These, together with the sails of the ship itself, were able to plough the ship with the camel through a not inconsiderable depth of sand between the city and the sea.
I suspect the US camels got their name, in a roundabout way, from these Amsterdam camels.

Click to expand...

Navy Study on Smaller Aircraft Carriers
Another oversight issue for Congress is whether the Navy should shift at some point from
procuring large-deck, nuclear-powered carriers like the CVN-78 class to procuring smaller
aircraft carriers. The issue has been studied periodically by the Navy and other observers over the years. To cite one example, the Navy studied the question in deciding on the aircraft carrier design that would follow the Nimitz (CVN-68) class. At a March 18, 2015, hearing on Navy shipbuilding programs before the Seapower subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Navy testified that it has initiated a new study on the question.

Advocates of smaller carriers argue that they are individually less expensive to procure, that the Navy might be able to employ competition between shipyards in their procurement (something that the Navy cannot with large-deck, nuclear-powered carriers like the CVN-78 class, because only one U.S. shipyard, HII/NNS, can build aircraft carriers of that size), and that today’s aircraft carriers concentrate much of the Navy’s striking power into a relatively small number of expensive platforms that adversaries could focus on attacking in time of war.

Supporters of large-deck, nuclear-powered carriers argue that smaller carriers, though
individually less expensive to procure, are less cost-effective in terms of dollars spent per aircraft embarked or aircraft sorties that can be generated, that it might be possible to use competition in procuring certain materials and components for large-deck, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, and that smaller carriers, though perhaps affordable in larger numbers, would be individually less survivable in time of war than large-deck, nuclear-powered carriers.

Click to expand...

Naval Today said:

Royal Navy’s HMS Queen Elizabeth’s mighty diesel generators have been powered-up marking a major milestone on the way to becoming an operational warship.

The 65,000 tonne future flagship of the Royal Navy has undergone months of preparation work by the Aircraft Carrier Alliance (ACA) to start the first of her four diesel engines, which are directly coupled to the generators.

Together, each power unit weighs approximately 200 tonnes – the weight of two medium size passenger jets.

Minister of State for Defence Procurement, Philip Dunne, officially started the first of the ship’s four diesel generators at the home of the UK’s aircraft carrier programme in Rosyth, Scotland yesterday bringing the ship to life for the first time.

He also announced that

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to install a new Vessel Traffic Management System (VTMS) to assist in the controlling and monitoring of all ship movements within Portsmouth Harbour and the Eastern Solent to prepare for the arrival of the carrier, around the end of 2016, beginning of 2017.

The diesel generator sets will provide sufficient electrical power to drive the ship at cruise speeds, but when higher speed is required, two Gas Turbine Alternators will also be used. Together they will produce 109MW of power, enough to power a medium-sized town.

To the end of May 2015, the Ministry of Defence had paid around £3.12 billion to BAE Systems on the Clyde (c. £1.925 billion) and to Babcock at Rosyth (c £1.194 billion) on the QEC programme. QEC work is estimated to support directly some 4,000 jobs and hundreds of apprentices at the Rosyth and Clyde-based shipyards.

Following sea trials (from 2017) and First of Class Flying Trials for helicopters and the F-35B Lightning II (starting in 2018), HMS Queen Elizabeth will undertake a coherent build up towards achieving an Initial Carrier Strike Capability in 2020.

Second of class HMS Prince Of Wales is now almost half complete at 30,000 tonnes, the forward island was installed in May 2015 forming the iconic carrier shape of the vessel. Initial Operating Capability of HMS Prince Of Wales is expected in 2023.

The aircraft carriers HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince Of Wales are being delivered by the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, a unique partnering relationship between BAE Systems, Thales UK, Babcock and the Ministry of Defence.

Click to expand...