Future Aircraft carriers
-
what do you think future aircraft carriers will be like? With the introduction of pilotless vehicles like UAV able to loiter for hours and perform strike missions I think eventually we won't see anymore surface aircraft carriers.
Also if the new JSF can be vertical launch eventually they will come out with a pilotless UAV version that will do away with runway.
Personally I think it will be an ideal choice they will build larger nuclear powered submarines or rather submersible carriers to take over.
Reason being submarines move underwater cannot be spotted by surface vessels radar or from the air, or by heat signatures except by sonar.
Imagine a nuclear powered submarine can insert undetected into enemy territory to perform blockade mission, hunt other submarines, insert commando or SOF teams, perform missiles strikes and now surface to launch air-strike missions via vertical launched UAV.
Thatz POWER MAN
-
Another one that is dreaming of carrier submarines.
Check out an earlier thread that debated about the merits of this lah.
Essentially to have a submersible that could actually work as a carrier, the darn thing would have to be huge, thereby creating huge magnetic anomalies, that would be easy to be detected by MAD. Also the size of the darn thing would limit it to where it can operate safely.
Not to mention the fact that it would have surface everytime it wanted to launch or land aircraft. And when a carrier is in full ops tempo, aircraft are launching and landing on a regular basis, the sub would have to dive, surface, dive, surface, dive, surface... letting every darn sub, frigate, destroyer and ASW aircraft in the region know where the heck it is. -
and suddenly, the earth has run out of fuel.
-
actually ideally, the sub will be nuclear powered and would carry maybe 5-10 very sophisticated UAV mainly for pure air-strike missions. The size of each UAV could be visibly reduced to maybe half or a third in size and could have folding wings so as to be modular and save space.Originally posted by insouciant:Another one that is dreaming of carrier submarines.
Check out an earlier thread that debated about the merits of this lah.
Essentially to have a submersible that could actually work as a carrier, the darn thing would have to be huge, thereby creating huge magnetic anomalies, that would be easy to be detected by MAD. Also the size of the darn thing would limit it to where it can operate safely.
Not to mention the fact that it would have surface everytime it wanted to launch or land aircraft. And when a carrier is in full ops tempo, aircraft are launching and landing on a regular basis, the sub would have to dive, surface, dive, surface, dive, surface... letting every darn sub, frigate, destroyer and ASW aircraft in the region know where the heck it is.
Everytime it needed to lauch a UAV yes it would surface only for a while like a whale coming up to get some air then dive down again. And since UAV can now loiter for hours theres no need surface and dive so often thereby not compromising it's position. -
even with UAV pilotless, they will still need a carrier, possible with short runway. The reason is with runway, it is still the fastest way to recover & launch air-vehicles ! Because still you would want to have the shortest time to recover numberous air-vehicle at a go and also launch a number of vehicles at a go.Originally posted by four-niner:what do you think future aircraft carriers will be like? With the introduction of pilotless vehicles like UAV able to loiter for hours and perform strike missions I think eventually we won't see anymore surface aircraft carriers.
Also if the new JSF can be vertical launch eventually they will come out with a pilotless UAV version that will do away with runway.
Personally I think it will be an ideal choice they will build larger nuclear powered submarines or rather submersible carriers to take over.
Reason being submarines move underwater cannot be spotted by surface vessels radar or from the air, or by heat signatures except by sonar.
Imagine a nuclear powered submarine can insert undetected into enemy territory to perform blockade mission, hunt other submarines, insert commando or SOF teams, perform missiles strikes and now surface to launch air-strike missions via vertical launched UAV.
Thatz POWER MAN -
Again, cost efficiency. Won't it be cheaper to have smaller carriers than can launched land attack missiles? Supersonic, go liao don need to return and land.
-
carriers have heat signatures can be detected on radar. stealth is the key.
-
anyone think an airborne carrier is a good idea? the US had airships which carried planes long time ago. i wonder if it's possible to build a jet powered one.
-
heat signatures detected on radar???Originally posted by four-niner:carriers have heat signatures can be detected on radar. stealth is the key.
U mean that they can be spotted by overhead satellites right? Well thats why i guess, wad u can't hide, u protect zealously. The carrier battle group has LOTS of protection. -
A sub is not a surface ship it cant fullfill e purpose of intimiation n put up a presence anyway a sub will have problem launching n recovering aircraft , manned or not in high sea states
-
There will also be e problem of directing e UCAV a sub cant communicate with e UCAV if it unwater even if it can be done by rising a com array e sub still must stay near surface it just cant achieve e stealth every1 is hoping
-
Actually the program of developing Cormorant UCAV deployed from ballistic missile tubes in Ohio class SSBN is being carried out by Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works, so an 'underwater aircraft carrier' is not so far-fetch after all.
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,SoldierTech_060323_cormorant,,00.html -
kewl
actually it's almost what I envisioned it to be, except in my vision a submarine surfaces just above the water line a hatch opens and ucav takes off vertically.
another idea I had was out of james bond movie I think octoqussy where a trident missile launches and breaks apart in mid air and ucav takes off
but this is better as there is no need to surface and if the cormorant idea takes off, man ... POWER
and goodbye aircraft carriers. -
but on hindsight, I think the one with the hatch is more pratical, the cormorant though can take off from underwater ... but how the americans expect to bring it back to rearm and for refuelling? does it expect the cormorant to dive back into the sea and swim back into the silo by itself
-
Like some guy already said, the aircraft carrier and it's battle group is a show of force.It wont be phased out anytime soon.Nothing else says "WE"RE WATCHING SO BEHAVE" better then a 6 ship CBG sitting off your coast. Better yet, when the US decides to put 6 CBG in one area.....that says alot more then 6 of these subs!Originally posted by four-niner:
kewl
actually it's almost what I envisioned it to be, except in my vision a submarine surfaces just above the water line a hatch opens and ucav takes off vertically.
another idea I had was out of james bond movie I think octoqussy where a trident missile launches and breaks apart in mid air and ucav takes off
but this is better as there is no need to surface and if the cormorant idea takes off, man ... POWER and goodbye aircraft carriers. -
l-l05l i cant agree more on this
