I once heard that Britain and France were thinking to build + run an aircraft carrier together. Is that project still running and do you think it could work?
Two different navies, with different operational procedures and different goals, missions, and agendas? Not a chance!
Good God - where did you hear that? It is hard enough getting 2 countries to sit down and design an aircraft together, let alone design, build and run a carrier!! Added to this - I severely doubt an Anglo-French effort would work. The last plane we made together was nearly cancelled when we couldn't agree on how to spell it! (Concord or Concorde). From a military view - what planes do we use? Dassault Super Entendards? Harriers? Some American stuff? Add politics in to this - can this carrier be used in Iraq? Nothing personal Castelot, but 2 nations would have to be very very VERY close partners to do something like this - and Britain & France just haven't got that kind of relationship, it seems to me.
Politicians That would be a first and something well worth documenting for future reference - you've done it once, you can do it again if you try hard enough.
RN carriers This site should give you some idea of the long and tortuosus route that the RN's carriers have to follow (and its not nice) http://p216.ezboard.com/fwarships1discussionboardsfrm3
Yeah, sorry, last I heard they were talking about getting rid of them. I'm not too up to date these days...
The prospect of a new large carrier means basically that the RN is facing a big question. To VTOL, or not to to VTOL, that is question. After twenty years of jump jet experence the RN might have problems it they found themselves having to prat around with stream catapults and arrester hooks again.
I forget the formal name of it but the British designed a type of Ice that would be able to 1.Not melt 2.Be stronger then wood or metal 4.Float They were going to use this kind of ice to make gigantic carriers almost islands unto themselves. Churchill aproved the research and then cancelled it because he didn't think it would pull it's weight considering the cost and amount of time to build it and how many ordinary ships could be built instead.
Ricky would you mind if I put that in my signature? I have a question. Does the Royal Navy have a big carrier like the 15 American ones or the french one? I also heard about the Franco-British Carrier, I would expect if it is still on Chirac will cancel it very soon because he is the proudest president of France since De Gaulle, and I mean Proud in a bad way.
The substance was called Pykrete, and the project was called Habakkuk. The costs for creating the infrastructure for this new industry were prohibitive.
Be my guest! The RN does not currently have any big carriers. we keep threatening to build one, but don't hold your breath. Re: Pykrete, I'm sure that this has been done. It is probably in the 'Secret weapons' area. I'm equally sure that our esteemed Dutch collegue will be only too happy to provide a link!
It's too bad about the RN big carrier; such a ship would give the RN more combat capability. If the Task Force that deployed to the Falklands in 1982 to retake the islands from Argentina had had one such vessel, I am firmly convinced that British ship losses would have been much lower than they were, due mostly to AEW and aerial refuelling capabilities.
I believe we only ditched out land big carrier a couple of years before the Falklands war. Saying that I also believe we were within eighteen months of ditching several of the ships that we simply won't have been able to go to war without. I think the Defence Minister responsible for the virtual gutting of the RN and the withdrawal of the patrol ship Endurance got a knighthood after the war. What a bloody country. :roll:
A knighthood, eh? Pity that the Argentines didn't wait until he had actually gutted the RN; they might have made him an earl or something then! :roll: