LB02 is sat on a frame, with supporting struts welded to her sides, that allowed the multiwheel transporters to lift and move the block. When the barge arrives in Rosyth and berths alongside, I presume the supporting struts will be cut away thus allowing the block to float clear of the frame when the barge is sunk. This would then allow the frame to return to Portsmouth for LB02 of Prince of Wales. Is this how others see it?
I know SDL, it's just sinking in for me how much of a strategic deterrent these beasts are going to be. They are going to be so much more than power projection and expeditionary assets. Sorry I don't know how to lock on but I just keep typing in Typhoon NL Tug into the search engine.Originally Posted by SDL
I typed that in, then bookmarked the page after finding the tug....
Yes exactly! In this pic I took last year you can see how the Block is slipped off the barge, it's dragged off the rear, if i remember correctly, there were 5 tugs and 2 pilots in the operation plus a rib. PS on the far right you can just about see the bridge of the AMT Trader just sticking up above the water, an amazing feat of engineering when over 95% of the barge is submerged.
Nice one
The block still has to be aligned correctly in position once in the drydock. The smaller struts will presumably be cut away but I imagine the larger supports will be retained and used for alignment purposes at Rosyth.
On a side note here are some pics i did last night of a model of the QE i did back in 2010 that was completed just after they announced the SDSR to switch to CATOBAR. Its in 1/700 scale and scratchbuilt from plastic card of various formats and based on the images available on 2010 (thus the JBD as at the time it was thought the F-35B would use the ramp in CTOL mode rather than STOL)
That's one truly beautiful work!
That is an awesome scratch build. Where'd you get the miniature F-35s?
That's fantastic work, Geoff.
Geoff,
10/10 with distinction !
Do you have a 1/700 scale Nimitz/Ford class to place alongside ? It would be the best comparison of what we're getting.
Regards
Arfah
Geoff B,
Very impressive, one question,are the square deck markings authentic if so are they specificaly a CVF design.
Nice One Geoff !
btw, it looks like parts for QE are coming thick and fast now !
http://twitter.com/#!/QEClassCarrier...831808/photo/1
i saw that pop up earlier.... which section is that?
Also, Typhoon is steaming along quite well according to the AIS site
Two carriers now a necessity following F-35 U-turn by Defence Dateline Group
Nineteen months ago, when the new coalition government published its hurried and much-maligned Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR), I was engaged in studying the review process for my dissertation. In interviews with officers and academics alike, all echoed the same warning: (I paraphrase)
‘The SDSR is only the beginning. You watch – the government will realise its mistake before the 2015 SDSR.’
And so it came to pass. On the decision to abandon the Short Take Off Vertical Landing (STOVL) F-35B in favour of the catapult-launched F-35C the experts have been proven remarkably prophetic.
To be entirely fair, the carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter did, in 2010, appear to offer three distinct advantages over the STOVL F-35B. Closer inspection and subsequent events, however, show these to be far from the ‘compelling evidence’ we were presented with in the SDSR.
Firstly, it is entirely true that the F-35C has a greater range and payload, operating out to 30% further and carrying almost 20% more weight. This ignores the facts that both variants can carry the full range of weapons that the UK intends to operate with the aircraft, and that the STOVL variant offers greater flexibility and agility – not least with regards to operating bases. Additionally, since 2010, the cost of fitting the necessary catapults and arrestor gear to the carriers has spiralled, cited as the primary reason for now reverting to the STOVL variant.
Secondly, in 2010, the F-35B was suffering from serious power and stress problems that threatened the future of the programme. Since January 2012, it has been declared back on track, albeit behind the other two and with a significant cost increase to the aircraft.
Thirdly, using catapult launched jets offered interoperability with French and American carriers and aircraft. This ‘requirement’ was parachuted into the SDSR at the last minute in order to justify selection of the F-35C. With jets and carriers due to enter service approximately simultaneously, interoperability was of no use in plugging the ten-year capability gap left by withdrawal of the Harriers and Invincible class carriers. Besides, weight issues mean that operating F-35s from the Charles de Gaulle looks unlikely to be possible. It is true, however, that abandoning ‘cats and traps’ will allow the new carriers and jets to enter service up to five years earlier. Furthermore, there are other important partner nations who operate STOVL carriers – Spain and Italy for example.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
