Be carefull on those carriers! (1 Viewer)

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

I don't mind the name Prince of Wales but i don't think it's right for a major ship of this nature, if the Navy were to say to me "Oh wise Lanc, what should we name the world's most modern aircraft carriers?" i'd reply "HMS Ark Royal and HMS Invincible"...........
 
The US is going to lay down the first ship in the CVNX program (next generation Super Carrier) later this year. It will be called the CVN-21 Gerald R. Ford.

It has many revolutionary designs, is slightly larger and faster, better propulsion.
 
Have they ever used any of the WW2 Flower Class corvette names again I think it would nice to name on of the new carriers after one of them in honour of the work of the corvettes . Wouldn't it sound nice to land or alit upon the Petunia or Pansy:p
 
No. But Jimmy Carter would imply a panzy *** short d*ck F'up for a president who in a single 4 year span screwed up the American economy such that mortgage interest rates became 18%, obtaining gas required you to push for bloody car to the pump, and kowtowing to any violent aggressor towards the United States.

...oh. Sorry. Those were supposed to be inside words.
 
Where did you hear that? If you dont time the landing right with the ships natural movement in the waves you damage the aircraft and possibly kill the crew.

what's safer, controlling your rate of decent vertically down, ensuring you can hit nothing and no one is in danger, landing on what i can testify to be very strong landing gear that has been perpose designed for vertical landings on ships, or hurteling towards a short runway at a few hundred knots, knowing that if you don't have enough power you'll crash into the back of the ship as you can't accelerate in time, too much power you'll just overshoot, you have to aim for 3 wires, if you miss you come around again or simply crash into a stretchy barrier, if you do catch then you're decellerated under greater G forces than a vertical landing and what's more your chances of hitting something or someone are far greater, i know which i'd prefer to be doing! just look at some of the comparative accidents involved in the processes! it's one of the reasons the JSF has a requirement to land vertically and it's the same principles that apply to helicopter landings, what's more your argument about timing is just as valid if not moreso for a conventional landing on a rocking Nimitz class...........
 
All I am saying is Lanc, it is not much safer than you think.

The timing is actually worse for a verticaly landing aircraft (I know this because of my time with Helos and doing deck landings) because you dont have the forward momentum to push you through it.

I do agree that it is somewhat safer to do a vertical landing, however dont just assume things, especially just because they are what the British are using. That is what I am getting at.
 
There are good points and bad points to both systems. I spent 3 1/2 years on the USS Saipan LHA-2 as a fire fighter and machinest mate. Besides the helicopters we also carried 6 to 7 harriers. After talking with many a harrier pilot, many would prefer to land in a convention jet then a vertical harrier in heavy seas which puts a limitation on the harrier. Ive seen a couple of harriers crash on the flight deck in heavy seas. The ship drops between two waves and then heavies up and swats it like a bug because it takes longer to get down. All naval aircraft have heavy landing gear so that not much help for any other type of naval aircraft.

Then again as you said conventional jets come in fast and furious on a conventional carrier. Both types are very dangerous to work around. Bottom line is you have to pay attention to whats going on and not have your head some where else.

As for countries purchasing carriers it depends on how much a country wants to spend on a aircraft carrier and what it will be used for.

Micdrow
 

Attachments

  • lha1.jpg
    lha1.jpg
    38.4 KB · Views: 69
I have bounced off a few of the LHA class ships before Midcrow... Better than those stinkin LPH's...

Take it by the comment you use to be or are a marine harrier pilot??? Ever land on the Saipan. Was on board her from 1989 to 1993.

Small world if we have met before

Micdrow
 
Surprised u dont already know Midcrow, but I was Navy SEAL from 87-97... We worked off of many Gator Freighters, and if memory serves me, used the Saipan on a few Ops...

To be honest lesofprimus Im still playing catch up by reading all the threads at the board including the old ones. :oops:

So much information to digest and sort through not to mention how much comes in on a daily basis.

Then you could of been part of the fun when the marines came on board. They always liked to take over the weight room. One cruise (dont remember which one) the captain made a challenge to the marines. They beat the best wrestlers on the ship and navy stays out of weight room. We win and we share it. Needless to say we sent in the seals and well it was shared for the whole cruise. One of many stories on board when the seals where on board.

Micdrow
 
I was most likely one of those SEAL Team Members u are describing... If Im not mistaken, it took place in 1990 in the Med, during the whole Liberia mess...

Wow does that campaign bring back memorie's. I flew in to the ship on a UH-53E from Free town Africa.

What a small world this is.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back