Re: Aircraft Carriers
No.. this could be the future USN fighter/attack aircraft. It will be a long time coming.
No.. this could be the future USN fighter/attack aircraft. It will be a long time coming.
PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Re: Aircraft Carriers
Yes, the FXX. I included it in .
thunderchief
Senior Member
Re: 2013 China Russia Joint Naval Training
Príncipe de Asturias and Giuseppe Garibaldi barely operated even Harriers , usually no more then six of them . Harrier is much smaller and lighter then F-35 B (which by the way doesn't have folding wings ) . Invincible class has about the same displacement as 22DDH if you exclude provisions for troops and armored vehicles within 22DDH . And yet , Invincible class cannot operate F-35B (lifts , hangars etc ... ) according to British .
We are left with Cavour , somewhat larger then 22DDH (30 000 t full load ) but according to Italians admission it cannot operate F-35B right now and will have to be modified with increased displacement (if they find money to do that
)
Príncipe de Asturias and Giuseppe Garibaldi barely operated even Harriers , usually no more then six of them . Harrier is much smaller and lighter then F-35 B (which by the way doesn't have folding wings ) . Invincible class has about the same displacement as 22DDH if you exclude provisions for troops and armored vehicles within 22DDH . And yet , Invincible class cannot operate F-35B (lifts , hangars etc ... ) according to British .
We are left with Cavour , somewhat larger then 22DDH (30 000 t full load ) but according to Italians admission it cannot operate F-35B right now and will have to be modified with increased displacement (if they find money to do that
)
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
But, here's a picture of the even smaller Garibaldi, at 13,000 tons, with eight Harriers.
They were capable of carrying even more if necessary, but because there have been no major conflicts for them to be involved in, of course they normally operated with far less than their overall capability.
The 22DDH will be able to accomodate F-35Bs, even if they make some changes in order to do so. In the long view and overall sense of things, those changes will be relatively minor.
My point is simple, the 22DDH, the Cavour, and a number of other vessels out there are capable of operating the F-35B. They will just have to decide if they want to, and then make it happen.
The 22DDH, IMHO, was and is being designed so that they can go that route if they decide to do so...otherwise they could have more easily and more cheaply just built two more Hyugas. but the Hyuga would be far more difficult and costly to convert to be F-35Bs operational. So, the Japoanese didn't do that. Instead, they are building two much larger carriers, with a longer, wider flight deck, a larger heavier elevator on the deck edge, and with a significantly larger hanger than the Hyugas.
Now, whether they end up operating F-35Bs off of them is something we will have to wait for. I personally believe, that as China builds more carriers and naval air capability, the Japanese will elect to make both of these new carries JSF capable.
Time will tell, but the fact that they are in a poisition to do so, tells you that the 22DDHs are capable of being effective light aircraft carriers.
And I am going to leave it at that now. The thread is about the 2013 China/Russian Naval exercises and we have driffted far off topic.
Here is a picture of the Principe de Asturias with seven Harries aboard...that's a good load for a 17,000 tons carrier.
But, here's a picture of the even smaller Garibaldi, at 13,000 tons, with eight Harriers.
They were capable of carrying even more if necessary, but because there have been no major conflicts for them to be involved in, of course they normally operated with far less than their overall capability.
The F-35B is 4 1/2 feet wider than the AV-8B and 4 ft longer. While that is a larger footprint, it is not a lot bigger, and the elevators of both the 22DDH and Cavour can handle them. The weight is 10,000 libs heavier empty...and that is quite a boit of course. But that was one of the points in building them. The US Navy and Marines wanted an aircraft that could carry significanlty more ordinance than a Harrier, and carry it further. in order to do that, the aircraft itself had to be heavier.Thunderchief said:
No, it is not...the Invincible was alos set uip to be able to carry troops if necessary. The fact is, the full load displacement of the Invincible class is 20,300 tons, and the 22DDH is 27,000 tons. it is a good bit longer, wider, had a heavy deck edge elevator, and has a signficantly larger hanger. Neither of these vessels were set up to have carrying troops be a major part of their operational capability, though they can carry some.thunderchief said:
If the Italians intend to continue with a fixed wing naval air capability, then they will most definitely operated F-35Bs off of the Cavour. The Italians are purchasing them, and the Harriers are at the end of their service life. It's just as simple as that.thundferchief said:
The 22DDH will be able to accomodate F-35Bs, even if they make some changes in order to do so. In the long view and overall sense of things, those changes will be relatively minor.
My point is simple, the 22DDH, the Cavour, and a number of other vessels out there are capable of operating the F-35B. They will just have to decide if they want to, and then make it happen.
The 22DDH, IMHO, was and is being designed so that they can go that route if they decide to do so...otherwise they could have more easily and more cheaply just built two more Hyugas. but the Hyuga would be far more difficult and costly to convert to be F-35Bs operational. So, the Japoanese didn't do that. Instead, they are building two much larger carriers, with a longer, wider flight deck, a larger heavier elevator on the deck edge, and with a significantly larger hanger than the Hyugas.
Now, whether they end up operating F-35Bs off of them is something we will have to wait for. I personally believe, that as China builds more carriers and naval air capability, the Japanese will elect to make both of these new carries JSF capable.
Time will tell, but the fact that they are in a poisition to do so, tells you that the 22DDHs are capable of being effective light aircraft carriers.
And I am going to leave it at that now. The thread is about the 2013 China/Russian Naval exercises and we have driffted far off topic.
asif iqbal
Banned Idiot
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
Invincible class can't operate F35B?? Whoever said the invincible class will even be in service when Royal Navy gets F35B, what are you talking about, F35B and invincible class have nothing to do with each other
And you are clearly not up to date with the F35B, Italy has a order set for this aircraft so that ends that story, full stop
Príncipe de Asturias and Giuseppe Garibaldi barely operated even Harriers , usually no more then six of them . Harrier is much smaller and lighter then F-35 B (which by the way doesn't have folding wings ) . Invincible class has about the same displacement as 22DDH if you exclude provisions for troops and armored vehicles within 22DDH . And yet , Invincible class cannot operate F-35B (lifts , hangars etc ... ) according to British .
We are left with Cavour , somewhat larger then 22DDH (30 000 t full load ) but according to Italians admission it cannot operate F-35B right now and will have to be modified with increased displacement (if they find money to do that
Invincible class can't operate F35B?? Whoever said the invincible class will even be in service when Royal Navy gets F35B, what are you talking about, F35B and invincible class have nothing to do with each other
And you are clearly not up to date with the F35B, Italy has a order set for this aircraft so that ends that story, full stop
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
What is the likelihood that Italy will be able to pay for them?
What is the likelihood that Italy will be able to pay for them?
asif iqbal
Banned Idiot
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
Italy order book was big, 131 units down to 90, they will buy but not as much as initially stated
For full Cavour operations they need 22 F35B, that is enough for the needs of the Navy
Italy order book was big, 131 units down to 90, they will buy but not as much as initially stated
For full Cavour operations they need 22 F35B, that is enough for the needs of the Navy
thunderchief
Senior Member
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
Nice pics , but Harriers usually perform rolling takeoff in real operations , like below . My guess is that those pictures were a bit of military show-off , cause I don't expect from Italians and Spaniards to fill the deck with aircraft in real combat situation .
[video=youtube;NAYjZPneasQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAYjZPneasQ[/video]
They operated in configuration that was practical : 4-6 Harriers and about 10-12 helicopters .
Again , problem of the lifts , hangar space and deck length . Yes , F-35B could take off vertically like Harrier , but to have meaningful range and payload it would have to perform rolling takeoff . Being heavier , it would require more deck .
Invincible class could carry troops instead of aircraft . 22DDH (also known as 19000t-class destroyer ) should carry both helicopters and troops by the design . Btw , Invincible class was around 22 000 t fully loaded .
Well they do intend , and will they have the cash remains to be seen .
22DDH could operate F-35B if they enlarge the hangar on the expense of carrying troops , reduce number of helicopters , and strengthen the deck to withstand the heat . I don't know if the elevators could support F-35B . Even if they do all of that , they could operate only handful of F-35Bs . Is it worth of trouble - I don't know
I said that such small carriers could not operate F-35Bs even for the tests . Check this :
Billion $ question
-------------------------------------------------
I agree to leave it at this , too much off-topic , and only future knows what would happen to 22DDH project
Nice pics , but Harriers usually perform rolling takeoff in real operations , like below . My guess is that those pictures were a bit of military show-off
, cause I don't expect from Italians and Spaniards to fill the deck with aircraft in real combat situation . [video=youtube;NAYjZPneasQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAYjZPneasQ[/video]
They operated in configuration that was practical : 4-6 Harriers and about 10-12 helicopters .
Again , problem of the lifts , hangar space and deck length . Yes , F-35B could take off vertically like Harrier , but to have meaningful range and payload it would have to perform rolling takeoff . Being heavier , it would require more deck .
Invincible class could carry troops instead of aircraft . 22DDH (also known as 19000t-class destroyer ) should carry both helicopters and troops by the design . Btw , Invincible class was around 22 000 t fully loaded .
Well they do intend , and will they have the cash remains to be seen .
22DDH could operate F-35B if they enlarge the hangar on the expense of carrying troops , reduce number of helicopters , and strengthen the deck to withstand the heat . I don't know if the elevators could support F-35B . Even if they do all of that , they could operate only handful of F-35Bs . Is it worth of trouble - I don't know
I said that such small carriers could not operate F-35Bs even for the tests . Check this :
Billion $ question
-------------------------------------------------
I agree to leave it at this , too much off-topic , and only future knows what would happen to 22DDH project
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
[quote-thunderchief]They operated in configuration that was practical : 4-6 Harriers and about 10-12 Of course they did, as I said, there was no war going on so they just needed to maintain their capabilities and perform their exercises. That was implicit in my own answer. The point is, they could carry more anytime it would have been warranted.
As to the Invincible class, as carriers they were rated at 20,300 for most of their life. The Illustrious, the only one left, is no longer a fixed wing aircraft carrier. They all went through a reft in the 1990s to increase the size of their flight deck, and then the Illustrious went through another refit recently to change her to an air assault aviation vessel. As a result, her displacement has increased to the current 22,000 tons shown by the RN and other sites because she is the only one left. Here is a good site that speaks of them as they were designed to be fixed wing (HArrier) aircraft carriers: , which has not changed its data to be up to date with the current data. I was speaking of her as originally outfitted for the fixed wig role in which she operated for most of her life. Anyhow, those additional 1,700 tons either way do not really have impact on this discussion because the Invincible Class were not ever going to be upgraded for the F-35B in any case.
As to the other issues, her hanger is already large enough for the F-35B. It is certainly true that the JMSDF could increase the number of JSF she can carry by enlarging the hanger, and by removing some of the room set aside for the humanitarian function.
As I said in my last post, if China continues to develop a larger and larger fixed wing naval aviation capability, I believe we will see the JMSDF respond with F-35Bs on the 22DDH vessels.
Of course they were showing off. It is clear that they did not intend to take off like they are shown on the Garibaldi. Just because they were lined up for a picture does not mean they will take off that way. They would take the Harriers aboard (in this case 7 and 8) and then gather them at the aft section and line up for the take off, rolling forward off the deck.
[quote-thunderchief]They operated in configuration that was practical : 4-6 Harriers and about 10-12 Of course they did, as I said, there was no war going on so they just needed to maintain their capabilities and perform their exercises. That was implicit in my own answer. The point is, they could carry more anytime it would have been warranted.
Of course it will. On any platform without a ski-jump, the roll will be longer. But they will roll to take off. The point here is, again, since they are capable of VTOL, they can maximize whatever deck is available to their benefit for which ever carrier they are operating off of.thunderchief said:
The 22DDH is not designed to carry troops as a matter of course. That will not be one of its primary purposes. It will be able to do so as required, principally for humanitarian relief. It is not an Amphibious or air assault vessel.thuinderchief said:
As to the Invincible class, as carriers they were rated at 20,300 for most of their life. The Illustrious, the only one left, is no longer a fixed wing aircraft carrier. They all went through a reft in the 1990s to increase the size of their flight deck, and then the Illustrious went through another refit recently to change her to an air assault aviation vessel. As a result, her displacement has increased to the current 22,000 tons shown by the RN and other sites because she is the only one left. Here is a good site that speaks of them as they were designed to be fixed wing (HArrier) aircraft carriers: , which has not changed its data to be up to date with the current data. I was speaking of her as originally outfitted for the fixed wig role in which she operated for most of her life. Anyhow, those additional 1,700 tons either way do not really have impact on this discussion because the Invincible Class were not ever going to be upgraded for the F-35B in any case.
Actually the 22DDH vessels were designed to be built with the proper heat treatment and elevator capabilities. They are supposed to be built having in mind the future with both the V-22 and the JSF. When the first one comes out, I believe we shall see that she has been. At some point, once she is commissioned, just like the Hyuga cross decked and tested the V-22, I believe we will see the 22DDH cross deck and test the V-22 and the JSF.thunderchief said:
As to the other issues, her hanger is already large enough for the F-35B. It is certainly true that the JMSDF could increase the number of JSF she can carry by enlarging the hanger, and by removing some of the room set aside for the humanitarian function.
As I said in my last post, if China continues to develop a larger and larger fixed wing naval aviation capability, I believe we will see the JMSDF respond with F-35Bs on the 22DDH vessels.
That's fine. They did move these posts to the Carrier thread here so it is not really off topic now. But we have pretty much exhausted all of the issues and points on both sides. All we can do really, is wait and see.Thunderchief said:
Re: Aircraft Carriers II
STOBAR system for CV inherently limits payload ?
Particularly heavy weapons air-ground/surface, big bombs... about 1T or more.
That is the question.
The Russian Navy aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov is only STOBAR carrier combat ready but we never see images with SU-33 armed ?
In more SU-33 is a specialised fighter, because Kuznetsov being used as a mobile air defense base.
Data for CATOBAR ?
I think STOBAR limit payload, your comments gentlemen, please.
STOBAR system for CV inherently limits payload ?
Particularly heavy weapons air-ground/surface, big bombs... about 1T or more.
That is the question.
The Russian Navy aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov is only STOBAR carrier combat ready but we never see images with SU-33 armed ?
In more SU-33 is a specialised fighter, because Kuznetsov being used as a mobile air defense base.
Data for CATOBAR ?
I think STOBAR limit payload, your comments gentlemen, please.