Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Aircraft Carriers???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Aircraft Carriers???

    Hello everybody!

    I have a really dumb question. We all know about mighty American aircraft carriers, they've been in media, and the world is awed at American military power.

    But....I have never heard of another country owning a single aircraft carrier. Don't either England or Russia has one? Surely Russia should have a bunch of them to counter American sea power and mobility. If Russia doesn't own one, then surely she owns a huge fleet of submarines ready to sink all of the US aircraft carriers in the event of war?

    Just a curious question....

    I am wondering if in near or distant future, would it be prudent to build an aircraft carrier capable of covering any theater or conflict almost completely from sea without depending on land bases? I have read somewhere that USA is trying to build a smaller version of aircraft carrier in order to reduce the impact of losing a single aircraft carrier that carries more than 100 aircraft in the event of war. Is this true?

    Somehow I feel that Rumsfield for all his tough act is really upsetting senior US military officials who don't agree with him especially in US Navy? Is this true?
    Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

    "Aim small, miss small."

  • #2


    General Characteristics, Nimitz Class
    Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding Co., Newport News, Va.
    Power Plant: Two nuclear reactors, four shafts
    Length, overall: 1,092 feet (332.85 meters)
    Flight Deck Width: 252 feet (76.8 meters)
    Beam: 134 feet (40.84 meters)
    Displacement: Approx. 97,000 tons (98,556.67 metric tons) full load
    Speed: 30+ knots (34.5+ miles per hour)
    Aircraft: 85
    Cost: about $4.5 billion each
    Ships:
    USS Nimitz (CVN 68), San Diego, Calif.
    USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69), Newport News, Va.
    USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70), Bremerton, Wash.
    USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71), Norfolk, Va.
    USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72), Everett, Wash.
    USS George Washington (CVN 73), Norfolk, Va.
    USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74), San Diego, Calif.
    USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), Norfolk, Va.
    Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) (under construction)
    Crew: Ship's Company: 3,200 - Air Wing: 2,480
    Armament: Two or three (depending on modification) NATO Sea Sparrow launchers, 20mm Phalanx CIWS mounts: (3 on Nimitz and Dwight D. Eisenhower and 4 on Vinson and later ships of the class.)
    Date Deployed: May 3, 1975 (USS Nimitz)


    General Characteristics, Enterprise
    Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding Co., Newport News, Va.
    Power Plant: Eight nuclear reactors, four shafts
    Length, overall: 1,101 feet 2 inches (335.64 meters)
    Flight Deck Width: 252 feet (75.6 meters)
    Beam: 133 feet (39.9 meters)
    Displacement: 89,600 tons (91,037.91 metric tons) full load
    Speed: 30+ knots (34.5 miles per hour)
    Aircraft: 85
    [b]Ship:[ b] USS Enterprise (CVN 65), Norfolk, Va.
    Crew: Ship's Company: 3,350 - Air Wing 2,480
    Armament: Two Sea Sparrow missile launchers, three Phalanx 20 mm CIWS mounts
    Date Deployed: November 25, 1961 (USS Enterprise)


    General Characteristics, John F. Kennedy
    Builders: Newport News Shipbuilding, Newport News, Va.
    Power Plant: Eight boilers, four shafts, 280,000 total shaft horsepower
    Length, overall: 1052 feet (315.6 meters)
    Flight Deck Width: 252 feet (76.8 meters)
    Beam: 130 feet (39.6 meters)
    Displacement: 82,000 tons (83,315.95 metric tons) full load
    Speed: 30+ knots (34.5 miles per hour)
    Aircraft: Approximately 85.
    Ship: USS John F. Kennedy (CV 67); Mayport, Fla.
    Crew: Ship's Company: 3,117 - Air Wing 2,480
    Armament: Sea Sparrow missiles with box launchers, Three 20mm Phalanx CIWS
    Date Deployed: September 7, 1968


    General Characteristics, Kitty Hawk Class
    Builders:
    CV 63 - New York Ship Building Corp., Camden, N.J.
    CV 64 - New York Naval Shipyard, Brooklyn, N.Y.
    Power Plant: Eight boilers, four geared steam turbines, four shafts, 280,000 shaft horsepower.
    Length, overall: 1062.5 feet (323.8 meters)
    Flight Deck Width: 252 feet (76.8 meters)
    Beam: 130 feet (39 meters)
    Displacement: Approx. 80,800 tons (82,096.69 metric tons) full load
    Speed: 30+ knots (34.5+ miles per hour)
    Aircraft: 85
    Ships:
    USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63), Yokosuka, Japan
    USS Constellation (CV 64), San Diego, Ca.
    Crew: Ship's Company: 3,150 - Air Wing: 2,480
    Armament: Sea Sparrow launchers, 3 20mm Phalanx CIWS mounts
    Date Deployed: April 29, 1961 (USS Kitty Hawk)

    Features: The aircraft carrier continues to be the centerpiece of the forces necessary for forward presence. Whenever there has been a crisis, the first question has been: "Where are the carriers?" Carriers support and operate aircraft that engage in attacks on airborne, afloat, and ashore targets that threaten free use of the sea; and engage in sustained operations in support of other forces.

    Aircraft carriers are deployed worldwide in support of U.S. interests and commitments. They can respond to global crises in ways ranging from peacetime presence to full-scale war. Together with their on-board air wings, the carriers have vital roles across the full spectrum of conflict.

    The Nimitz-class carriers, seven operational and two under construction, are the largest warships in the world. USS Nimitz (CVN 68) is undergoing its first refueling during a 33-month Refueling Complex Overhaul at Newport News Shipbuilding in Newport News, Va., in 1998.
    The French field one aircraft carrier and the Royal Navy has one as well, but I'm not sure if it's still active. Neither are in the same class as the carriers the US fields. The Russian navy had several smaller, less capable carriers, but they were hardly the match of a Nimitz class battle group.

    That's the real power of a carrier: it's a combined arms team. The carrier is only one piece of a much larger battle group that contains numerous support vessels, destroyers, cruisers, etc. This force is defended with a three dimentional air defense net, anti-submarine technology, advanced radar and sonar capability not to mention its fighter wings. The Soviet navy never had anything that could have seriously threatened the combined power of all the US Navy's battle groups.

    Working together, two or three of the US Navy's battle groups are capable of silencing most any of the world's air forces within a few days.
    Editor-in-Chief
    GameSquad.com

    Comment


    • #3
      The British Carrier is in for repairs currently but they dont really need it. They invented the Ski jump carrier, which is really a destroyer on crack. It allows the harriers to not takeof full vertically but accelerate and take of of something that resembles a large ski jump. And I havent found anything on the French carrier.
      Doesn't read Al Franken, can't watch Al Jazeera, will attack dumbasses. Anyone but Rumsfeld '04.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Headshot
        The British Carrier is in for repairs currently but they dont really need it. They invented the Ski jump carrier, which is really a destroyer on crack. It allows the harriers to not takeof full vertically but accelerate and take of of something that resembles a large ski jump. And I havent found anything on the French carrier.
        The French have one Aircraft Carrier.

        It is called the Foch CV and they have had it since the mid 80's I think.

        The French have purpose built a few Helicopter Carriers, using Alouette Anti-Ship helicopters, they are the Joanne de'Arc Class, I think theres 3 of them, not sure.

        Britains is the Ark Royal and its currently in the Med, possibly moving to strike Saddam?

        The Russians have one, and probably the best (it has lots of Shipwreck SSM's, better than TASM's and Harpoons).

        It is called the Kuznetsov CV, and they have had it since the early 70's, but it has had major re-fits.

        The Indians have one, the Hermes, it was originally the H.M.S Hermes but we sold them it in the 80's, after the Hermes had been to the Falklands.

        the Argentinians have one, the Veinticino de Mayo (25th of May, i think). It has Rafale Aircraft and some Etendards, just as the French Foch does.

        The Russians are currently doing extensive tests to see which of their two main aircraft (Su-27 and MiG-29) can operate from the Kuznetsov, while it is keeping its complement of Su-25 Frogfoot Air-Support Aircraft.

        The British use the Sea Harrier Jump-Jet on the Ark Royal, I think the Indians have Mirage's and Etendards onboard the Hermes.

        Well I think that is all. The CHinese have tried to buy the Kuznetsov off the Russians, but the Russians turned them down on the basis of thier own defence!
        As I walk through the valley of death I shall fear no Evil.

        For I am the meanest mother f***** in the valley.

        George Patton jr.

        Comment


        • #5
          Russian Submarine Horde....

          Yes the Russians have lots of Sub's, their submarines are in two catagories, the Missile Subs, like the Kursk, and the Hunter Sub's like the Akoula class.

          The Hunter Subs are alway 'tailing' shipping in the world just wiating for the order to strike, just as American Hunter Subs do.

          The British only have Missile Submarines, in the Trafalgar Class (6 i think). H.M.S.S Trafalgar or Triumph (can't rmemeber exactly which one) was one of the first to fire on Kabul and bagram during the NATO War on the TAQ in Afghanistan (TAQ? Taliban Al Quada).

          Most countries have their own Sub's, Australian, Japan, China has quite a few, old Russian ones though.

          India has a Sub Squadron, as does Brazil, Argentina does not, which is strange after the sinking of the Belgrano in 1982.
          As I walk through the valley of death I shall fear no Evil.

          For I am the meanest mother f***** in the valley.

          George Patton jr.

          Comment


          • #6
            http://www.janes.com/defence/naval_f...0819_1_n.shtml

            In equipment terms, the decision to replace the UK Royal Navy's (RN's) three current Invincible-class aircraft carriers with two much larger Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) vessels was perhaps the single most important outcome of the UK government's 1998 Strategic Defence Review (SDR). Entering service in 2012 and 2015, they are expected to displace about 55,000 tons apiece and each embark up to 48 aircraft, making them among the largest, most powerful warships ever to serve with the RN.

            CVF also represents one of the most demanding product design, production engineering and systems integration challenges ever to be addressed in the UK. With an initial acquisition and support cost projected to be around 2.7 billion at current prices, and a through-life cost estimated at about 6 billion, it is the highest-profile defence capital programme of recent times and a flagship for the MoD's 'Smart Acquisition' initiative.

            But what is the justification for such a major capital investment? The SDR concluded that the new strategic environment requires mobile, flexible armed forces capable of rapid intervention on a global scale. These expeditionary-type force-projection operations also require forces with the widest utility across a range of military tasks and missions. And pivotally, the SDR recognised a continued need to be able to project offensive air power independent of host-nation support.

            Against this backdrop, the case for CVF was articulated, accepted and subsequently condensed into a succinct statement of mission need: "The CVF is to be a joint defence asset with the primary purpose of providing the UK with an expeditionary offensive air capability that has the flexibility to operate the largest possible range of aircraft in the widest possible range of roles."
            Editor-in-Chief
            GameSquad.com

            Comment


            • #7
              will they phase out the ski-jump carriers witht he introdution of the new bad boys?
              Doesn't read Al Franken, can't watch Al Jazeera, will attack dumbasses. Anyone but Rumsfeld '04.

              Comment


              • #8
                I am pretty sure Britain still has 3 carriers available! Illustrious and Invincible are aged but I'm certain they are still in one piece.

                Comment

                Latest Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X