Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Space Stations, Space Shuttles and Beyond - The Aerospace Discussion Thread
GarandMarine:
--- Quote from: Akima on 11 Dec 2014, 14:23 ---
--- Quote from: Kugai on 11 Dec 2014, 14:16 ---I think Her Majesty's Armed Forces need to cut their losses and work on a Navalised version of the Typhoon or look at Rafelle, which I believe the French are already using aboard their latest Carriers.
--- End quote ---
Would that not require the UK to switch back to full-blown catapult-equipped aircraft-carriers?
--- End quote ---
Yes it would. The French, like actual modern naval powers, use a proper CATOBAR system as opposed to the patently ridiculous and tactically stupid STOBAR system the Russians seem to like so much. If I was the PLN I'd be considering bringing suit against whoever in the Russian government sold us that backwards technology. Or just convincing the Politburo and PLA to take Siberia in retribution.
Some points:
The French have a solitary aircraft carrier the Charles de Gaulle. As of 2013, the second French carrier, which was to be based on the original Queen Elizabeth class before the MOD got workshy and decided they weren't ready to expand into real Naval Aviation yet, has been completely canceled with no present plans for revival. The De Gaulle operates Dassault Super Étendards in the Strike Fighter role and the Rafale M model as an air superiority fighter and interdiction. It's worth nothing the Rafale M is a 95% parts commonality type with it's land based compatriots, the B and C models, but this leaves it at a bit of an odd spot in it's carrier role, as like it's land based predecessors the Rafale M is unable to fold it's wings for storage below deck, reducing total aircraft capacity significantly.
Meanwhile the United States is leaving steam powered catapults behind in favor of the new EMALS system. Which means we're shooting planes off our carriers basically via rail gun. Which is awesome.
SubaruStephen:
J:
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHy08ZPav88
i'm not sorry
ev4n:
I do kind of chuckle at the people who think that cancelling a commitment to the F-35 and doing something new wouldn't somehow have huge overruns or problems. The last 30-50 years of defense aircraft procurement says otherwise.
GarandMarine:
I also find a lot of the "reported" specs don't match up to what pilots, the first and loudest to complain about fucking anything, are saying. Marine Corps Harrier pilots are in love with the B model, probably because it's faster, more maneuverable and longer range with more payload capacity their current ride by a significant amount so that's a fairly easy lot to please, but from what I heard about initial sea trials for the C model Marine and Navy Hornet drivers are pretty damn pleased too, and the F-18 is a performance aircraft and a half.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version