Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Carriers for the RN!

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #61
    Originally posted by Lonestar


    If a A380 is in such immediate danger that it needs to put down right now on an aircraft carrier, then it's still screwed, as the carrier wouldn't have enough time to clear it's deck of aircraft.
    Wouldn't be more correct to say that those aircrafts that can't get away are screwed ?
    With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

    Steven Weinberg

    Comment

    • #62
      You would probably want to aim for the superstructure actually. That would help you stop.
      VANGUARD

      Comment

      • #63
        Our current aircraft carriers will be 30+ years old by then, so it is a timely replacement given our force projection requirements.

        What we do need to do however is to stop treating our army as a bunch of minimum wage cannon fodder that can be sent willy-nilly into the battlefield with substandard or non-existent equipment.

        Seriously, our army is treated like the equivalent of dog**** on your shoe - it is a ****ing embarrassment the way our government doesn't give a **** about our armed forces in this country...

        All we need to do is downgrade our nuclear deterrent to a minimum level (as that is something we are slated to spend at least £10bn in the coming years on keeping it up to date at its current levels), and that could pay for all the upgrades necessary in all our armed forces - including these aircraft carriers!

        Oh, and that figure for the carriers...

        Probably double or triple it by the time the MOD has got its incompetent hands on it and the carriers are finally delivered...
        Is it me, or is MOBIUS a horrible person?

        Comment

        • #64
          Originally posted by Mr Snuggles


          A380's wingspan is 261 feet. You don't think that'd clip anything?
          A C-130 was landed on one of the older carriers some years ago, but they did not try to take off. It may have been the Enterprise, just don't remember.

          Comment

          • #65
            C-130 has 132 feet wingspan.

            The A380 is almost exactly twice as wide as a C-130 in wingspan. There's no way it'd land on a carrier, it wouldn't fit.
            "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
            Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

            Comment

            • #66
              Speaking of Erith:

              "It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith

              Comment

              • #67
                Originally posted by Joseph
                A C-130 was landed on one of the older carriers some years ago, but they did not try to take off. It may have been the Enterprise, just don't remember.
                Not only did it land, but it took off as well

                Aerospaceweb.org | Ask Us - C-130 Aircraft Carrier Operations
                http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0097.shtml


                (includes footage)

                Better vid:

                Last edited by germanos; July 5, 2008, 05:46.
                "post reported"Winston, on the barricades for freedom of speech
                "I don't like laws all over the world. Doesn't mean I am going to do anything but post about it."Jon Miller

                Comment

                • #68
                  The real question is: can the Space Shuttle land on a carrier?

                  And can it lift off from one

                  Comment

                  Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                  Working...
                  X