Should US Market New Sea Control Ship? ( Carrier)

Variants for different customers or mission profiles
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6907
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post06 Mar 2014, 09:44

spazsinbad wrote:So now you are saying that South Korean and not the US should produce such a flat deck? Again who is going to buy it and why? Countries contemplating F-35Bs have flat decks - with some unlikely exceptions such as Singapore. Is that it?


Honestly, I don't see what you don't get??? First, few countries can afford large Aircraft Carriers. Yet, many countries would like them. In addition many richer nations can and will be able to afford at least a small number of F-35's. Plus, a good number of them have Navies.


So, the question is could a CVL be constructed at a reasonable price to support a Carrier Air Wing made up of F-35B's.

My proposed ship would be ~25,000-30,000 tons Aircraft Carrier with a Ski Jump to operate F-35B's. In would be a relatively simple design with just CIose in Weapons Systems. As the Escort Ships would provide the main Area Air Defense and ASW Missions for the Carrier. As a matter of fact the design would likely look like an enlarged "Príncipe de Asturias" but with some Stealth Features.

This would be my Vision of the Sea Control Ship for the 21st Century.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24784
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Mar 2014, 10:14

Looks like waffle to me. This is the thread title: " Should US Market New Sea Control Ship??? ( Carrier)" Which 'navies' (without any STOVL aircraft so far) will require a US Made Ship as you describe. Yes some countries have or will have (perhaps) their own F-35B capable flat decks either now or near future. And that is that. Which US shipbuilder is going to build a ship you describe on speculation of making a sale. There must be by now a zillion drawings of sea control ships on the internet. Designs on paper are easy enough - depending on details supplied. Where is the interest other than the well known countries described vaguely so far?
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

southernphantom

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1086
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Nuevo Mexico

Unread post06 Mar 2014, 16:08

spazsinbad wrote:Looks like waffle to me. This is the thread title: " Should US Market New Sea Control Ship??? ( Carrier)" Which 'navies' (without any STOVL aircraft so far) will require a US Made Ship as you describe. Yes some countries have or will have (perhaps) their own F-35B capable flat decks either now or near future. And that is that. Which US shipbuilder is going to build a ship you describe on speculation of making a sale. There must be by now a zillion drawings of sea control ships on the internet. Designs on paper are easy enough - depending on details supplied. Where is the interest other than the well known countries described vaguely so far?


Well, let's look at some of our current carrier/LHD/LPD operators...
Japan: has its 'helicopter destroyers' that can probably be refit for VSTOL at some point
SKorea: same as above
Chile: likely doesn't have a need (has a Foudre)
Brazil: seems to want a conventional CATOBAR carrier, not VSTOL
Thailand: hasn't had an operational air wing for years. I don't expect this to change anytime soon, but I could understand the desire to have the capability for purposes of 'countering' the PLAN.
France: typical Euro financial debacle; I doubt they'll buy another carrier for a few decades
Spain: Just bought the Juan Carlos, intends to operate AV-8s
Australia: Has the Canberra-class, with probable ability to operate F-35s.

I probably missed a few (Italy, perhaps), but the majority of navies that want some sort of helicopter/VSTOL carrier are either operating non-flattop LPDs, or have their needs met. As a replacement for existing ships, it just doesn't look like there would be a market. I simply don't see any navy buying into a new class of ship without a very specific requirement for it.
I'm a mining engineer. How the hell did I wind up here?
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 688
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post06 Mar 2014, 21:13

Wasn't Turkey in the market for a flat top?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24784
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Mar 2014, 22:28

IF getting one designed/built already is "in the market" - then yes - otherwise no.

HERE is a forum link to info: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=20426&p=265951&hilit=LHD#p265951 [scroll down]
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2896
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post07 Mar 2014, 19:37

southernphantom wrote:...quote]

Well, let's look at some of our current carrier/LHD/LPD operators...
Japan: ..SKorea: ..Chile: ..Brazil: ..Thailand: .. France: ..Spain: .. Australia: .. Italy .. but the majority of navies that want some sort of helicopter/VSTOL carrier are either operating non-flattop LPDs, ...


Which of these have an aircraft elevator with the length and width (size) and weight capacity to manage the F-35B?? :shock: :)
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24784
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post07 Mar 2014, 19:44

All the LHDs: Spain, Australia with Italy having a purposed for F-35B design also. France has a conventional CATOBAR carrier - nuke powered - with their own RAFALES - why do they need F-35Bs? The others are in the works or pie in the sky. CHILE? :D Wot? :D

Thailand (STOVL) and Brazil (CATOBAR) have KAPUT carriers at moment - not likely to be resurrected but fling enough money at them and they may leave port.

OOPs - I needed to read the earlier input from 'southernphantom'. The Spanish LHD was purpose built to operate F-35Bs from the getgo and is even better at it than any fantasy that Oz will use them (only cross deck temporarily at best other worldly F-35Bs) because the junk that enables this on the Spanish LHD was partly removed to enhance the other missions for the Oz LHDs - ski jump remains though - a honeypot for other F-35Bs :devil: which could demonstrate to Ozzers that we need F-35Bs; if only temporarily based on the Oz LHDs for transits, before offloading at some remote island, such as FidgetyLevu (name obscured to protect the guilty). :doh:
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

southernphantom

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1086
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Nuevo Mexico

Unread post09 Mar 2014, 23:43

Yeah, Chile has an LPD (they also used to have some Newport-class tank landing ships if memory serves), but I don't think it can even embark more than three or for helicopters.

Thailand's carrier hardly ever leaves port, supposedly. Her Harriers were retired several years ago.
I'm a mining engineer. How the hell did I wind up here?
Offline

exheadshedguy

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 21:13
  • Location: Sydney

Unread post10 Mar 2014, 21:49

Sorry if I get the quote formatting wrong.

spazsinbad wrote:All the LHDs: Spain, Australia with Italy having a purposed for F-35B design also.

Wrong. Only the Cavour is a dedicated purpose-built F-35 carrier. Even then it will require refit and modification for the airplanes. This also applies to USS America and Co.

The Spanish LHD was purpose built to operate F-35Bs from the getgo and is even better at it than any fantasy that Oz will use them (only cross deck temporarily at best other worldly F-35Bs) because the junk that enables this on the Spanish LHD was partly removed to enhance the other missions for the Oz LHDs - ski jump remains though - a honeypot for other F-35Bs :devil: which could demonstrate to Ozzers that we need F-35Bs; if only temporarily based on the Oz LHDs for transits, before offloading at some remote island, such as FidgetyLevu (name obscured to protect the guilty). :doh:

Again, the JCI is not purpose-built for F-35s. If Spain goes down that road then refit will be required. Those comments about the ADF LHDs is hopelessly wrong. SS, it seems you're just parroting what a former DMO loudmouth used to write in this forum. He's a first class source on anything involving subs, but the LHD story happened far from his desk. The aviation spaces and facilities in the LHDs are near identical to JCI. They have no fitted ability to support Harriers because the ADF has no Harriers, not because design limits or changes. I have no idea of where this myth about aviation fuel bunkers being different came from - they are not. You are also fantasising to a ridiculous extent if you think an order for ADF F-35Bs would arise from any crossdeck showing-off. In the unlikely event that the ADF does a 180 degree turn on putting F-35Bs in the LHDs, then the two ships will be suitably refitted.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24784
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Mar 2014, 22:27

I'm happy to be corrected. However this nonsense about LHDs and F-35Bs has been going on on this forum for years now. I probably started it with my first post here on what used to be termed 'the very long thread'. Whatever happens the Oz LHDs can be refitted for sure. I saw MELBOURNE the carrier refitted and readjusted many times but whatever is needed for the LHDs we have - to operate F-35Bs - I really have no idea (except those garnered by the naysayers). Without access to LHD details, as a civilian, it gets pointless for me to say more. However I see no move yet for any such thing as F-35Bs on LHDs for Australia. In fact I see public statements saying exactly the opposite by noteworthies such as the soon to be CDF AM Mark Binskin. He would be someone to get onside I reckon.

Here is the start of the 'very long thread' 55 pages and I believe my first post here:

Possibility small STOVL carrier USN/USMC 06 Jul 2009: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=12631

Who knows the future though. I was alive, just joining the RAN, when MELBOURNE the carrier had just made a Uturn from NOT having fixed wing, to become a helo only carrier (mid 1960s) to suddenly acquiring new fixed wing aircraft, to carry on until 1982, when carrier scrapped and fixed wing folding in 1984 (but I was not in the RAN then). So I know things can change quickly, as requirements change. This sudden reversal was due to the Indonesion Konfrontasi of the day and perhaps we see this in our immediate future from a different country - perhaps requiring some more 'turns'?

You make claims - other people make claims - I would prefer you link to some public knowledge about these matters. The Spanish LHD was designed to operate the F-35B (with knowledge known at time of design/building) so doubtless some changes are required, as you point out, similar to those required for the USN LHAs etc. However no big deal there whatsoever. Ships are changed / refitted necessarily a lot due to what they do - rust in saltwater. It will be good to see the bottom of our first LHD be painted in the Graving Dock in Sydney soonish to help prevent that rust.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6907
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post11 Mar 2014, 08:15

Well, we will have to agree to disagree I think. As a Sea Control Ship in my opinion could have considerable market as the options for most countries in regards to Aircraft Carriers is far and few between. Thought such ships are highly valued and the queen of anyone's Navy. :wink:


For example I think Brazil would be a excellent possibility. As she wants a New Modern Carrier to replace the current Sao Paulo. (i.e. ex-Foch)


So, what options does Brazil really have??? Honestly, I doubt she could afford a large Aircraft Carrier like the Queen Elizabeth or Charles de Gaulle! Though it has been wildly discussed that France would like to build a ~40,000 Conventional Carrier for Brazil. Yet, that too is likely an very expensive option. Then what about the Air Wing??? Well, most would say a Navalized Gripen. (i.e. Sea Gripen) Yet, that would be very expensive to develop and would be inferior to the F-35. Which, would likely be cheaper off the shelf than the aforementioned.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... WYg-VUAi7I
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24784
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Mar 2014, 08:45

So you have a market of one? A one off ship will all development, design & first of class problems thrown in - cheap huh.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6907
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post11 Mar 2014, 09:05

spazsinbad wrote:So you have a market of one? A one off ship will all development, design & first of class problems thrown in - cheap huh.



Honestly, I've always respected your opinion. Yet, your sarcasm on this thread is causing second thoughts... :?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24784
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Mar 2014, 10:14

I'm a tuff crowd eh. I'm challenging your idea - which is half baked imho. You have thought through your idea now I hope.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

lookieloo

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1244
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

Unread post11 Mar 2014, 12:33

Corsair1963 wrote:The F-35B could open up a "Brand New World" in many countries to Naval Aviation. Yet, the only thing holding it back is a economical platform. (i.e. Small Carrier) So, should US Government and Industry market a simple, reliable, and efficient Light Aircraft Carrier. Which, could be produced at a reasonable price. Yet, would be large enough to operate F-35B's.

My thought would be an enlarged Sea Control Ship Design. (Carrier) Which, the Spanish "Príncipe de Asturias" was based on. Of course it would have to be larger to accommodate the F-35B. My guess something at ~25,000 tons.
No

--------------------------------
Countries interested-in, or able-to-afford such a platform will most likely prefer building it themselves. The market just isn't there; and in any case, the money would be better spent on multi-mission platforms like LHDs wherein such limited goals are concerned.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Variants and Missions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests