The Ship Enthusiast thread
- Thread starter growingvegetables
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
They have had some helo landings, but no fixed wing yet.
JtB
Prepare a way for the Lord
- Location
- North Hampshire
Was walking in Southampton this week and saw a number of huge cruise ships docked. While they look impressive feats of engineering, they remind me of 1960's suburban tower blocks and I can think of nothing more horrendous than being confined to one for days on end with 1000's of other people. I think I'd need a holiday afterwards just to recover.
midlife
Guru
And a drone apparently ....
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
As new bikes for sale, could be salt-sprayed, also colourful back-packs!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-40914737
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-TPFIR89LE
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-40914737
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-TPFIR89LE
Piemaster
Guru
- Location
- UK City of Culture
True story. I was working on a container ship, went through some horrible weather and as in that video a couple of stacks collapsed and the containers split.
Filipino crew were straight in there. One came up to me and says 'You want bicycle seat?' and proudly displays his ill-gotten gains.
Now where there are bicycle seats, there must be bicycles, right? Errr...or there could just be more bicycle seats. Lots and lots of bicycle seats. There ended up being old oil drums full of them scattered around. I left the ship and didn't go back to it, but have wondered what they did with them.
Filipino crew were straight in there. One came up to me and says 'You want bicycle seat?' and proudly displays his ill-gotten gains.
Now where there are bicycle seats, there must be bicycles, right? Errr...or there could just be more bicycle seats. Lots and lots of bicycle seats. There ended up being old oil drums full of them scattered around. I left the ship and didn't go back to it, but have wondered what they did with them.
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
growingvegetables
Guru
- Location
- Leeds
Hmm. Let me get this right?
Since the Fleet Air Arm don't have the planes, they're going to experiment with trucks instead? OK ... they are indeed affordable. But?
Since the Fleet Air Arm don't have the planes, they're going to experiment with trucks instead? OK ... they are indeed affordable. But?
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
They need to practice aircraft handling as they're going to be hosting US Marine F35B's for a couple of years. Nice of the UK to build a baby flattop for the Americans, eh?
Flick of the Elbow
Guru
- Location
- Edinburgh
This Twitter photo from Portsmouth Historic Dockyard pointing out that's old Portsmouth to the left and not a model village.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Interestingly, the USS George H.W. Bush has had to anchor out to sea as it won't fit in Portsmouth. As big as the Queen Elizabeth is its a tiddler in size and aircraft capacity compared to a Nimitz or Gerald Ford class carrier.
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
Hardly a tiddler and a design that the USMC are hugely jealous of. The Ford class need a crew 4 times bigger than QE to effectively operate 25% more strike aircraft. Steel is cheap, manpower costs - 4000 wages for 50 years?
Also, Nimitz and Ford are nukes and therefore barred by treaty from going to certain countries, (Australia for one) and what's the point of having virtually unlimited range when you still need a couple of tankers following you around with fuel for the air wing?
The RN is in a good place if they can get the numbers up. T45, T26, Astute, the QE class and F35 make it one of the most advanced navies in the world - second only in some (not all) respects to the USN.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
The Ford and Nimitz class do need vast crews. However, they can maintain 4-8 times the sortie rate. They don't need refuelling, and don't need vulnerable supply ships to follow them into war. Indeed, they're so vast they carry bunker fuel themselves to resupply their escorts. Their effective time on station is much longer than the QE class.
OK, they're arguably more general purpose than Nimitz and Ford, being able to support marine expeditionary operations and humanitarian operations far better than they can, but the US have the America class carriers to fill that need. As a consequence of making them general purpose instead of attack or ASW vessels is to make them a jack of all trades, but master of none.
The Queen Elizabeth class is big, very big. The good news is that outside of the United States there isn't another navy that can match them militarily, although forthcoming generations of Chinese and Indian home grown designs seem likely to do so. They're big, they're capable, but they're not nearly as capable and effective as they could be if it weren't for repeated political meddling with costs, build, design and intended mission.
A Nimitz carrier is militarily, on its own, designed to be a match for any 2 entire countries navies. As lovely as they are ours simply aren't in that class for force projection and area defence.
OK, they're arguably more general purpose than Nimitz and Ford, being able to support marine expeditionary operations and humanitarian operations far better than they can, but the US have the America class carriers to fill that need. As a consequence of making them general purpose instead of attack or ASW vessels is to make them a jack of all trades, but master of none.
The Queen Elizabeth class is big, very big. The good news is that outside of the United States there isn't another navy that can match them militarily, although forthcoming generations of Chinese and Indian home grown designs seem likely to do so. They're big, they're capable, but they're not nearly as capable and effective as they could be if it weren't for repeated political meddling with costs, build, design and intended mission.
A Nimitz carrier is militarily, on its own, designed to be a match for any 2 entire countries navies. As lovely as they are ours simply aren't in that class for force projection and area defence.
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
The Nimitz class burns through stores of Avgas at a prodigious rate, hence they're always accompanied by at least one tanker.
The Nimitz class also has a poor deck design which has been addressed with the Ford's. The aircraft numbers posted for Nimitz weren't achievable in practice. Aircraft have also got a lot bigger - Super Hornets are a lot bigger than Hornets.
Added to this, a lot of the aircraft on Nimitz aren't fighting aircraft - they're CODs, E2s, rotary etc. In practice expect a Nimitz to go to war with 48 warplanes. Compared to QE and her 36 F35, that's not bad, especially as F35 can be sortied faster than F/A18
The Nimitz class also has a poor deck design which has been addressed with the Ford's. The aircraft numbers posted for Nimitz weren't achievable in practice. Aircraft have also got a lot bigger - Super Hornets are a lot bigger than Hornets.
Added to this, a lot of the aircraft on Nimitz aren't fighting aircraft - they're CODs, E2s, rotary etc. In practice expect a Nimitz to go to war with 48 warplanes. Compared to QE and her 36 F35, that's not bad, especially as F35 can be sortied faster than F/A18
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
Sorry, don't mean to come across as confrontational but I've followed the story of the carriers and the F35s since their inception and I have former colleagues whose children are serving on the QE. Almost from day one there's been a lot of negative press and misinformed reporting about the project.
