Good, take away all the hardware associated with VTO&L and it might be a decent interceptor or fighter bomber. No way ican it carry a decent load of ordnance along with the VTO&L ****load.
Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Collapse
X
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Good, take away all the hardware associated with VTO&L and it might be a decent interceptor or fighter bomber. No way ican it carry a decent load of ordnance along with the VTO&L ****load. -
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Harrier did. You saying that Lockheed cannot improve on that aged aircraft? Have we been sold a very late pup?It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.
The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.Comment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
The F-35B is the only one with the S/VTOL capability and the only one with the weight penalty. It loses about 1/3 of fuel capacity, IIRC to the lift fan hardware so range/loiter time is limited."The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. WardComment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Yes.Comment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Take a couple of those old battle wagons and convert them to clean and recycle the Pacific dump that's out there.Comment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Well, not quite. The Harrier had a combat range of 300 miles and a top speed of 660 mph with a capacity of 3200 pounds for fuel and munitions. The F-35B has a combat range of 505 miles and a top speed of 1200 mph with a larger fuel and munitions capacity, so it is an improvement on the Harrier. On top of that you get the advanced platform and stealth capabilities. Sure, it doesn't have the range and capacity of the F35A or C, but the operational characteristics are quite different to allow for the S/VTOL."The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. WardComment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
How many Harriers could you build for the cost of one F35?Comment
-
"The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. WardComment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Missiles are cheap, and getting better and smarter all the time. Meanwhile, the limits on reaction time and high-G manoeuvres in current fighter jets are pegged to the limitations of the human cargo supervising the computer that runs its fly-by-wire systems. The human and his bulky, fragile life-support system is the weak link in the chain any more.
I don’t think the future of military aviation lies in manned vehicles any more than the future of the army lies in knights on horseback, no matter how pretty they look on parade.Comment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Missiles are cheap, and getting better and smarter all the time. Meanwhile, the limits on reaction time and high-G manoeuvres in current fighter jets are pegged to the limitations of the human cargo supervising the computer that runs its fly-by-wire systems. The human and his bulky, fragile life-support system is the weak link in the chain any more.
I don’t think the future of military aviation lies in manned vehicles any more than the future of the army lies in knights on horseback, no matter how pretty they look on parade.
Drones and unmanned vehicles will have a part in the battle space, but we’re not there yet."The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. WardComment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
The F35 in none of its variations is capable of close air support of ground troops fighting so called insurgents. It was initially sold to replace the A10, but it can't do what the A10 does, it can't absorb damage like the A10 can, and notably it is incapable of flying the number of sorties per day, week, month and year that the A10 can. The F35 is a maintenance hog.Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.Comment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
True, but if you’re trying to make a Harrier fill the role of an F35 and compete with the platforms the F35 wa intended for, it likely will not do well."The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. WardComment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
great idea in a time of war.. but how many men and man hours would it take to out fit say, The USS New Jersey for such a role and how many men to keep her running? We would be better not scrapping the old carriers and refitting them"If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"
-Dalai LamaComment
-
Re: Reactivate battleships as hybrid aircraft carriers? What!?!?
Slight thread drift - the US Navy had / has a Service Life Extension Program program on it's aircraft carriers ( to add 15 years to the original 30+ active service life ) -- it should be fairly straight-forward to apply it again to each of the carriers to alter them to a new type of mission.
RickCharter Member - - Professional Procrastinators Association of America - - putting things off since 1965 " I'll get around to it tomorrow, .... maybe "Comment
Comment