Be carefull on those carriers!

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

well in an enviroment like that they're bound to happen, with all that activity in such a small space it's a credit to the crews that so few accidents do occour..........
 
it's one advantage of our smaller carriers and Harriers, vertical landings are far safer and obviously need less space, no steam catapults and movements are much less, aircraft are only ever moved from around the island or the rear onto what is in effect the runway so movements are very predicatable, obviously though there are other advantages to the American carriers :lol: ...........
 
You really believe that Lanc. I have been told that the most dangerous aspect of carrier work is jet exhaust. Unless you blokes have perfected the turbine engine, I can't see whether catapult versus ski ramp really makes a difference in the prime safety risk. :)
 
that's not the point i'm making, on the 4.5 acres of deck space on the Nimitz carriers there are aircraft all over the place, it's a hive of activity and you have to be on your guard all the time as aircraft could come from anywhere, on an Invincible class carrier they only ever have to move aircraft from the island or the rear of the deck to the launch position, which is a set position i.e. everyone will know when there's an aircraf there and when it's there she's about to take off, not like an american carrier where there're exaust all over the place, what's more the vertical landing has always been considdered far safer for both pilot and deck crew..........
 
The british carriers are just like our helo amphib assault carriers.

The CV's used by the US are in a whole different league compared to the less usefull british carriers.
 
I don't believe that the British have a need for American style ginormous nuclear carriers. Tarawa class Amphib Assault ships can conduct V/STOL, STOVL, VTOL, and tiltrotor operations in addition to rotary wing.
 
I also don't agree with the proposed names HMS Queen Elizabeth II and HMS Prince of Wales, HMS Prince of Wales but you can't name a warship after an aging Queen, what happens when she dies? what will it do for moral in a war if a ship named after one of our greatest monarchs sinks? furthermore we've had an Ark Royal at the centre of our fleet for hundreds of years, we need an Ark Royal.............
 
the lancaster kicks ass said:
I also don't agree with the proposed names HMS Queen Elizabeth II and HMS Prince of Wales, HMS Prince of Wales but you can't name a warship after an aging Queen, what happens when she dies? what will it do for moral in a war if a ship named after one of our greatest monarchs sinks? furthermore we've had an Ark Royal at the centre of our fleet for hundreds of years, we need an Ark Royal.............
Click to expand...

I still like Illustrious , Renown or Repulse as ship names Lanc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Why on Earth Are We Still Building Aircraft Carriers?
2 3
Replies
48
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
A
Best brand marketing on a postwar military aircraft?
Replies
1
Views
405
ThomasP
T
T
B-52 to be in service for over 100 years
Replies
11
Views
727
MIflyer
M
M
What Happened To All Those Advanced Missiles?
Replies
1
Views
691
Admiral Beez
A
M
Avoid Rides on IL-20/22
Replies
0
Views
349
MIflyer
M
Back