Author Topic: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration  (Read 111485 times)

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #350 on: July 05, 2021, 11:04:37 PM »
Once outside of Chinese controlled waters their carriers will be even more vulnerable than the USN carrier allegedly are.

Offline arkon

  • Paper Building Maestro
Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #351 on: July 27, 2021, 12:32:34 PM »
Not sure if these have been on here before
the paper gods demand sacrifice

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #352 on: July 28, 2021, 01:52:33 AM »
I like but they could probably loose the fighters.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Frank3k

  • Excession
  • Global Moderator
  • Formerly Frank2056. New upgrade!
    • My new webpage
Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #353 on: July 28, 2021, 03:47:47 AM »
That could be your mobile floating kit repository, Greg.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #354 on: July 28, 2021, 06:03:43 AM »
I'm shocked to realize that this one has been missed in this topic.
 :smiley: :icon_fsm:

“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #355 on: July 28, 2021, 06:34:23 PM »
Read Shackleton's paper/book and it clearly illustrates the issue is, time and time again governments outline strategies / political needs, that set capability requirements and then only fund the bare minimum (if that) to acquire the capabilities their strategies / desire demand.

They look at short term acquisition costs, not through life sustainment and upgrade costs, let alone the need to be planning the next generation of upgrades or even capability replacement / evolution, well before a required in service date.  The reason the RAN got the Adams class DDGs was there was nothing cheaper that met the requirements and even then they required extensive modernisation and improvements shortly after entering service and spent much of their careers slipping behind the required capability improvements, before finally being superseded by even less capable upgraded frigates.

Collins hope was getting the carriers in service they would prove themselves and earn more capable replacements, well they proved themselves but weren't replaced.  It could even me argued that a more capable carrier class, able to operate more advanced aircraft, could have mitigated the need to buy the DDGs when we did.

According to the paper buying a more capable, but also more expensive design, i.e. the USNs Belknap class DLG, instead of the Adams likely would have been better value for money and if the USN upgrade path was followed, cheaper to own and operate over their lives while being far more relevant and useful through that life.  Because we bought the lower end of the carrier escort capability we spent their entire service lives trying to lift them to the next level., now we are repeating the entire process again 40 years later, buying a smaller, less capable ship than required and then spending big to get some, but not all, of the desired missing capability.

I find your analogy very intriguing Volkodav
It would be fascinating to see and compare costs of Charles F. Adams DDG vs Belknap class DLG🤔
I'll have to go through some books to assertain crew size differences.
Really got me thinking now.....