New British Aircraft Carriers

[Crumbso]

Well thats what I mean U.S aircraft while nice (exept for the f-22) generally are very expensive We can't really afford that many. Value for money and the actual price can be very different. Besides I don't think we should put all our naval aircraft to be v/stol aircraft.

[Blade]

Yes you were our biggest floating base for a long time, and one big enough nuke from Russia would sink it.

[Crumbso]

Well thats another reason for looking at the typhoon because assuming the carrier is big enough then it should be possible to launch the typhoon from a cat.

[ozzy72]

The trouble is that the Typhoon would require extensive airframe modifications (read massive), and salt water proofing. As it is already massively over budget I don't think its going to happen!
I don't see what is wrong with the Rafale. Its gorgeous, and has a naval variant. I know we'd have to get all the manuals translated, but its a lovely kite no matter what your standing.

Ozzy

[Blade]

The trouble is that the Typhoon would require extensive airframe modifications (read massive), and salt water proofing. As it is already massively over budget I don't think its going to happen!
I don't see what is wrong with the Rafale. Its gorgeous, and has a naval variant. I know we'd have to get all the manuals translated, but its a lovely kite no matter what your standing.

Ozzy

Yea so. You gotta spend a little money to get ahead in this world. As long as the pilots are happy with it thats what counts.

[Craig.]

i believe the eurofighter on the whole is alot better, after looking through my air combat magazines, it doesnt give alot of info on the eurofighter compaired to the Rafale but i believe the load out on the typhoon is alot more for one.

[Craig.]

to add to that i believe the JSF is not vertical take off, its only Short take off vertical landing.

[Blade]

IT can take off vertically.

[Craig.]

you might be able to
but the JSF cant:)
http://www.lmaeronautics.com/products/c ... mc_rn.html
the USMC and Royal navy version has STOVL thats all, the other two according to the site are normal take off and landing. check out the site its quite cool for info

[Crumbso]

Weeelll its actually a suggestion because the harrier is meant to be a stovl aircraft according to the designation but I have definately seen more htan a fair share of harriers take off vert at airshows.

I guess it might be reffering to the fact that it can't take off vertically with full loadout.

I can take off vertically.

Thats an interesting skill but please spare me the details it sounds rather messy.

[Tequila Sunrise]

The Rafale is a reasonable fighter but the Eurofighter is better, but the UK will never buy a french aircraft especially when its in direct competition withe a UK design.
I was looking for info on the new carriers this morning, aparently they wont have cats or arrestor gear but will be built with the posibility of installing such equipment to operate future aircraft if nessisary.

[Blade]

AHA, FOUND IT! You said it couldn't take off vertically.      :-/  Look at some of the vids.

http://www.lmaeronautics.com/gallery/vi ... index.html

[Craig.]

there goes any chance of picking up some F-18's to replace the harriers,(while waiting for full F-35 deployment) but oh well.

[Hogans_Alley]

Aircraft carriers are "glitter' weapons. The size of the ship and the number of aircraft on board are impressive. They are good diplomatic weapons cause they are in the news throughout the world everyday. HOWEVER, the most effective weapon platform are the submarines. A single sub can knock that carrier off the surface with a one nuke subroc. Carrier surface ship escorts are useless. Do you know what we use for our carrier escorts? Yep-you said it, Los Angeles type attack subs.

Hogans Alley

[Craig.]

thanks for the link blade:)
It will be interesting to see if the JSF does utilize the Vertical takeoff in its final version, i doubt it. it will prob be like the harrier, in that it can be used but only when it is desperatly needed, the amount of wear and tear on a harrier during a full load VTO to normal flight is apparently very huge and a new engine is needed alot sooner than when a short take off is used. vertical landing isnt as stressfull due to the obvious lighter weight. and various other small things