Weekly Aircraft Carrier Check

How's your nation's carrier program coming along?

Other urls found in this thread:

savetheroyalnavy.org/the-reasons-hms-queen-elizabeth-has-two-islands/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_(missile)#Joint_New_Air-to-Air_Missile
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I thought the Brazilian carrier was dead

France is the only country besides us intelligent enough to figure out how to use catapult system instead of r*Mps... impressive

We bought a new one

They just restocked. Probably converting it to fly fixed wing. Probably.

It's happening lads

Although this is a small step, it wouldn't take us a long time to make the 1st Air Fleet great again

Does Mexico have a carrier?

Extremely questionable source

The elevators on this class cannot lift F-35s and modifications would take years.

It got decomissioned, but they bought the HMS Ocean from Britain.


>inb4 thread gets derailed because someone asked why

>tfw we will replace them by 2025

>Aircraft Carrier
We never built it. One on pic was made by Ukraine, Russia stole it.

Nope
Our navy tried to form a naval fighter squadron in 2006 with intentions of looking into something like that
Congress blocked it with the excuse of the elections and since it’s election time this year again, I doubt that will change

the absolute state of burger and frog ramplets

Eh. I think our entire air force would fit into one carrier and for what? To sail around in the Gulf Of Finland that's well within reach by just flying there directly.

I think that if a cunt doesn’t have a blue water port with unrestricted ocean access a carrier is absolutely pointless

>The elevators on this class cannot lift F-35s
Apparently it can; they were designed so, according to a JMSDF source.
The rear elevator has the dimensions of 15x14 meters and a capacity of 30 tons, while F35B is 15.4x10.7 meters in size and 27 tons in maximum takeoff weight. The length might seem to exceed 15 meters, but, as it's an open elevator, some excess isn't really a problem.

>Binlan
>aircraft carrying aircrafts

Since we're all here, what the fuck happened in Hawaii?

Good pic

Friendly reminder that twin towers and ramps are the future.

>intelligent enough
>france

Their carrier was years behind schedule and the cost spiralled out of control, and in the end they only got one of them which spends more time in dry dock than being out at sea.

Nice m8

Oh, it's going great. We only need to increase the number of aircraft in our air fleet by 300% and then we might have enough aircraft to fit onto a light aircraft carrier. Then we just need to get a carrier. ezpz

On the serious side, I think that we should just dismantle our entire military. There's no point, it's just a waste of money. We can have some militia reserve force and that's it. We'll never be able to resist an invasion of a larger power conventionally and history has already shown that we don't need to have a military to deal with the Serbs. I guess we only have one in order to satisfy NATO's requirements.

>He's too afraid to post Portugal's

Is the carrier behind that lego set?

WOAH...
I will never insult Portugal ever again

Wow is that the presidents airship??

Did you know that Portugal is the longest-surviving independent nation?

Bravo Portugal!

WOW!

Please take good care of her.

what's the point of the twin towers?

>We'll never be able to resist an invasion of a larger power conventionally
>therefore we should dismantle our military
What kind of argument is that?

The indian water is literally brown, HAHAHAHAH

poo poo pee pee

/noramp/ master race reporting in

ramp cucks need not apply

Is your cunts carrier a hangarlet? Or can it actually take the longest and thickest planes out there?

>their country's planes need a boat because they can't touch the water

It's because of shit like this that none of you have ever found India.

Australia has 2 of the Spanish one

It's to convince Muslims to join the navy as pilots.

Half of thos are aeronef-carriers though

>r*mps
I propose that any "country" with a r*mp carrier shouldn't count. All in favor?

>can't afford a ramp
decline of the US, ladies and gents

>no r*mp
You Japs are okay in my book

>Oldtugal

R*mps are what poor countries use because they can't afford a catapult.

apparently carriers that rely on jumps have a reduced loadout cap and tonnage of aircraft?

We don't wage war in areas that don't belong to us, so we don't need them.

>inb4 but you're in nato and you contribute special forces
Yes, you can thank America for that as well.

Real funny that proposal came to the front days after the Japanese MoD came to visit the UK and HMS Queen Elizabeth.

>largest carrier fleet

for about 2 years :)

No they were not designed for the F-35, considering the F-35B was not designed until after 2004.

I don't think either of those statements holds water, there's lots of information that's fairly contradictory on whether they were provisioned for F-35s or not. However, clearly if they've been moving forward with the idea, those provisions have been made.

And I'm fairly sure that the F-35B had been design, or rather the requirements with a general concept, had been written up before 2004. Given It was selected for my nation's carrier program that started in the early 90s.

For point of reference, this image was created in 1999.

We're also one of the few Green-water navies that operates worldwide, regardless.

non-green-water

That has to be Denmark or France.

...

I seem to recall Denmark, Norway and France having some issues with their independence in the early 1940s.

We have to fix our jets before even considering to buy a carrier for them.

proud to be colonized by them and being one of their descendants.

So did Portugal when we liberate them in 1580 and again in 1807 when this time along with the french we brought them freedom.

You are looking for either Sweden or Russia as the euro countries with the longest unconquered/sovereign run.

>what's the point of the twin towers?
To trigger the fuck out of yanks.

To space out the funnels, give the ship greater redundancy if damaged, not as much wind turbulence, greater deck space, better vision for the flyco tower to see the planes coming in and better vision for the forward bridge to see where it's going.

savetheroyalnavy.org/the-reasons-hms-queen-elizabeth-has-two-islands/

>You are looking for either Sweden or Russia as the euro countries with the longest unconquered/sovereign run.
Turkey and UK actually

Turkey exists since 1920. If we accept Ottoman Empire as Turkey, they were cucked by WWI winners, which is a big part of the reason why Turkey happened.

And UK happened in the XVIII. Sweden freed itself in early XVI and has remained unconquered ever since. I dont know much about Russia but I think it unified and stopped being a cuck of the mongols in the XVI too?

lol you guys should've stolen a US carrier instead

you brought us freedom? are you drunk?

Brazil now only has helicopter carriers that don't have any attack helicopters.

Please give me one.

Man every time I see an image that shows how massive warships can be I'm reminded of why I love them.


You better build a ship with the Yamato name again Japan.

bump

Already found extraterrestrial life but we're still keeping it a secret. Don't tell anyone.

man, send the Zero planes again!!

too bad you guys will never get one.

Maybe when flying carriers are a thing we will have water carriers

I know :(

Pls sell us ships

Decomissioned because it was too expensive. Also, we really have no need for an aircraft carrier nowadays.

god, is that fucking Norfolk? Makes me wanna puke just looking at a pic of it. Good ships tho.

how do you liberate malvinas without a carrier?

You guys are experts at liberating islands with carriers.

Like some Korean piece of shit could actually make it across the Pacific..
.

Why would you even have one?
Carriers are all about power projection. Mexico should invest more in counter terrorism units, and law enforcement. A carrier is a huge waste of money for you guys.

Why would we use a carrier if we don't have fighter planes?

Well that's why we don't have one
Our military is constructed to maintain internal order (not the same as fighting crime btw)
But current objectives and needs of the army according to the generals are developing armor technology IFVS and SPGS to refit and upgrade armor unit, tanks? maybe, air force wants a strong light attack wing and a proper helicopter fleet, fighters are still a distant dream with the death of the F5 fleet and it will remain the weakest of our branches, due to the lack of gunships and its main mission will remain to provide close air support to the army, they also want to upgrade the training programs personal gear is now fully produced by the military
The navy tho does want projection power due to our large EEZ, but still focused on surface units, multi purpose frigates with a lot of corvettes.
Naval aviation its interested on Sea Hawks to accompany our larger ships, and for logistics larger landing ships are in order to be build by our own shipyards
Subs and carriers of any kind are in no near plans, destroyers are also out of the question, our last destroyer was sunk last year.
And it seems that the navy has for now abandoned the plan for naval fighters.
But the security law says the airforce needs at least 24 new jets by 2020 and to build their own jet fighter by 2030

i hope this useless bathtub sinks

Why would the Japs go to the UK for carrier tips?
Shouldn't they go to the US? I'm not ripping on the UK. I just think it makes more sense.

The UK and Japan have been known to collaborate when it comes to ships.

They were allies until WWII happened.

I'm hating the naming conventions as of lately.
Can we stick with names like "enterprise" or "wasp"?

I don't like ships being named after presidents, especially recent presidents that didn't leave a legacy. Robert Ford? I mean. Who care about Ford? I can already see the "USS Donald J.Trump" on the horizon.

Yeah, but it made sense back in the 20s and 30s.
The UK was still the world's premier navy. They still "ruled the waves."

They don't any longer, and their shipbuilding has fallen off. Now, the US rules the waves, and has the best Naval tech.

You know, I can never comprehend how many people work and live on these boats.

1000s? How can the boat be that big. I can comprehend what it must be like on the inside.

I guess it also comes to "would the US be willing to cooperate?" For all we know you already declined the Japanese request to co-op.

Nimitz class carriers

5000 people live in this boat what the fuck?

I am watching a tour of a Nimitz class carrier. Its cramped as hell but comfy in an odd sense. I really can see why military community would become so closeknit.

I feel bad now, I would be way to claustrophobic in such andenvironment but really wish I could assimilate as it really looks like a more interesting place to work than a standard 9-5

Please, don't post anymore.

It's only a few off 6000

My country will never buy aircraft carriers since we saw what happened to the Thai's. It's just too expensive we're not in a position, nor interested to invade any countries in the near future. The closest thing that we are pursuing is probably the multi-role supply ship (MRSS) which the leading contender is made by Indonesian PT PAL. It would probably be a deluxe version of the Indonesian Makassar Class(pic) but fully armed.

Deck would need special coating to handle the heat of the F-35B during landing.

Syrian campaign showed, that for Russia normal airbases is prefferable than having outdated air carrier.

...

not only that, but japan and britain are strengthening defense cooperation these days again. we are now jointly developing a new meteor AAM for example.

>In 17 July 2014, MBDA agreed to jointly research a Meteor derived missile with Japan.[93] A spokesman from the Ministry of Defense (Japan) confirmed on 14 January 2016 that, Japan and the United Kingdom will develop a Joint New Air-to-Air Missile (JNAAM) by "combining the UK's missile-related technologies and Japanese seeker technologies".[94] The active electronically scanned array seeker of the Mitsubishi Electric AAM-4B would be mounted on the Meteor, because the AAM-4B is too large to be carried in the Japanese F-35 weapons bay.[95][96] The meteor's current seeker is not as advanced as the AAM-4B and this would give Britain access to advanced Japanese seeker technology.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_(missile)#Joint_New_Air-to-Air_Missile

as for the carrier program, probably, the information of british carrier operation is more helpful to japan than american one is in terms of making the best of limited resources, as japanese program isn't something like deploying a dozen of nuclear powered super carriers like america does.

...