Comments by "ZIPZ" (@zipz8423) on "New British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth to be world's second largest supercarrier" video.

  1. I really wished we had embarked on building 3 of the new carrier class. That way, we could have had 2 ships available at all times, with only 2 hulls they are "guaranteeing" about 250 days per year when both will be available, either side of this, we will only be able to field one hull at a time. We DO have the money available to build 3 ships and equip them but we choose to spend it on other "stuff". Another issue I have is the lack of an up to date CIWS even as basic as a SEARAM mount to give it some stand off range for self defence. Hell even a lousy 8 cell Sylver A-50 for ASTER-15 would do, its an active missile so ARTISAN would suffice for cueing.
    3
  2. chrisbea49  No mate, I said 3 Hulls would have been better, not 3 SMALLER hulls. 3 or 4 small CVS type hulls are less economic to equip and operate than 2 large CVF but I cannot argue with you about the tiny airwings they are going to get. In wartime and emergencies they can surge to 48 but only if we actually buy the F-35 in decent numbers.
    1
  3. chrisbea49  The studies were done in the 90s when they compared having 3/4 Invincible type CVS hulls versus two 65,000 t CVF, the conclusion was it was more cost effective and efficient to build 2 large hulls instead of operate and equip 3/4 smaller ones, ie put your eggs in two baskets instead of 3/4 which tactically may be an error. However, economic reality means we didnt want to pay for 3, if you buy 3 you have to pay to equip all 3, so the costs spiral and you lose the reason you wanted to build 2 in the first place. For me it is imperative we buy enough jets to fly from the 2 we are building. I do think the F-35 is way too expensive I would have been happy with Rafales or Superbugs or at a stretch, Navalized Typhoons but that is a big piece of work. Hell even a Navlized Gripen would have been nice, the UK is  doing that work right now for export purposes with SAAB.
    1
  4. Hope your cousin gets the CVF, they recently announced the CO of the QE, a Commodore no less.
    1
  5. Bernie Lobb Yes I remember the dits, mostly seakings I recall but around 26 SHAR`s? 52 sounds a high number, remember the Group was using other ships as extra deck real estate  like ATLC before she was hit, for helicopters I think.
    1
  6. 1chish  The RAF already have their eye on the CAPTOR-E successor.
    1
  7. I think its closer than you think:P
    1
  8. As factual as can be posted here, I will post a link for you mate, make of it what you will but CAPTOR -E successor  is something the RAF want and wanted rather than  CAP-E because they felt it was more advanced.
    1
  9. ZolaMagic25  Its called deterrence. It has worked well. Stops the big boys from killing us all.
    1
  10. ZolaMagic25  Against anyone with a similar massive conventional and nuclear force. Lets face it, two small non nuclear armed countries squabbling  aren't going to destroy the planet.
    1
  11. I wouldnt like to try!
    1
  12. Its deep draught is 71,000 t so no, it isn't half the size. To be fair its irrelevant nit picking.
    1
  13. Helga Schmidlap  2 large ships of this size are more economical to run than 3 or 4 smaller carriers. Thats about the bottom line and why they were ordered.
    1
  14. Then the Russians must be on the same drugs because their future carriers look almost the same as the CVF design with dual islands.
    1