Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "HMS Queen Elizabeth Returns To Portsmouth As 'FULLY TRAINED' Aircraft Carrier | Forces TV" video.

Anyone big enough to run them has there own ship building industry to support.
5
Weird definition of scrap?
4
If it was leaving port you may have a point, but your entering to do stuff like maintenance.
3
Anything with moving parts goes quickly. You always get it round the anchors. Seems the lifts will be the same.
3
@maxmullen6337 The French didn't design it. BMT and Thales UK did, and then BAE and Babcock were added.
3
Do you really not get it? Look at history, the weak are at the mercy of the strong.
3
Jealous much?
3
Yet you think Brazil can?
3
@catlee8064 Carriers supported ops in both Iraq and Afganistan.
2
Its a joint Lightning force. Made up of both FAA and RAF but the first squadron stood up was RAF so that's the name they go with.
2
@VanderlyndenJengold just like the Typhoon and Tornado we reuse names.
2
@catlee8064 You say initial part of the conflict as if that some how negates the point, do you think we'll never have an initial part again? And I don't know the route but the obvious one would be over Pakistan not Iran, so again your making pointless points. I do know it happened.
1
Shaun Mclaren Iraq was after Afganistan. And HMS Ark Royal was there.
1
Its designed aroubd 36 F35B and will normally 24 on an op, though it could fly more in surge conditions
1
@rat_king- what are you babbling about?
1
@HeidiLandRover Saving money is a great thing. Though you say you already knew you reply doesn't seem to follow. It's a joint force not an RAF force.
1
@DaRovmeister what's rust streaks got to do with the integrity of the vessel?
1
Presumably shielding, she is in her nineties. Nothing like Andrew.
1
@jfpaisley2281 You say hiding as if it's something wrong, it's the responsible thing I'd hope any great grand parent would be doing. Money for the Queen comes from the crown estates. And your naive if you think we are getting rid of the Monarchy any time soon.
1
The size makes it less vulnerable rather than more as it can take more damage. While expensive in the abstract it's cheap for what it is.
1
It's a Joint Lightning force so the pilots are both RAF and FAA (Fleet Air Arm - Navy flyers).
1
@mollie626 it has been considered, but it cost too much for too little gain over Merlins.
1
@mollie626 money on V22s means less on F35s. I'm not disputing the V22 would likely be better, just the extra it gives doesn't justify the extra cost. Having AWACs is essential, having the best isn't.
1
@mollie626 you seem to be missing what I've said. I agree the V22 is better but getting would mean we lose something else. We can barely afford enough jets as it is. And ultimately a carrier is about it jets. 24 F35 with Merlin support is better than 20-22 F35 with V22 support.
1
@mollie626 also F35 R+D isn't anywhere near a trillion. That is the lifetime cost including acquisition and sustainment of thousands of jets over 50 years.
1
@squirepraggerstope3591 Your numbers are too high. With all kit we want the carrier is designed for 36 F35B and 4 Merlins. Adding more helicopters means running less F35. 24 F35 is a very reasonable amount with a significant ASW contingent.
1
@squirepraggerstope3591 The ship is designed to get the most out of the jets not the other way round. And given the ship cost less than the jets and will last twice as long thats the right way round.
1
@squirepraggerstope3591 The amount she can take comfortably is the amount she's designed for.
1
Not sure if that is actually true never mind it being naive. The world wars brought incredible leaps in advancement and we only went to space for the sake of the military.
1
@iananderson7883 Look at HMS Ocean, because that's Brazil's standard. A twenty year old ship, build to commercial standards, that's becoming there flag ship. And Ocean went because of the carriers, we'll have spare capacity for 5-10 by which time it would be needing replacing anyway.
1