[Klaustrophobia]

so apparently carrier is to the brits what LHD is to the americans

[headdie]

so apparently carrier is to the brits what LHD is to the americans

the americans dont build carriers, even they classify what they build as supercarriers lol

[FreeSpaceFreak]

Also, I am reasonably certain that an RPG can not inflict more than superficial damage on a supercarrier.

Yeah, I wonder what would actually cost more. Fixing a dinky little hole from an RPG impact (not even that if we're talking a HE round), or firing the Phalanx for half a second it takes to shot down a round?

If the RPG hits a walkway or any other exposed manned area, someone might get hit (are there shrapnel RPGs?) and die. I say it's worth firing the Phalanx.

[Dragon]

There are HE projectiles for RPG. Though despite that, the RPG operator would have to be really, really lucky to actually hit a sailor on the ship. The whole point of armor on a ship is to protect the ship and it's crew, so they generally don't walk around outside without a good reason in conditions where an attack is expected (like near Somalia). Sure, this could happen, but I think the odds are minuscule.

[StarSlayer]

Carriers are going to be part of some form of a CVBG.  They aren't interdicting pirates off Somalia by themselves.  If some asshole manages to get close enough to shoot it with a shoulder rocket then there has been a massive failure at all levels of the battle group.  That's the entire point of escorts.  Hell, after the Cole incident even in a harbor there should be an umbrella of protection between that ship and some RPG toting nut.

It's nice to know Sea Whiz can pick it up if necessary but treating it like a credible scenario is silly.  If the RN actually allowed their flagship to get RPG'd then Horatio Nelson's corpse would rise from his sarcophagus trudge down to the Admiralty building and start slapping people with his one good arm.

[NGTM-1R]

so apparently carrier is to the brits what LHD is to the americans

Troo faxs: LHDs are actually CVEs in disguise.

[General Battuta]

so apparently carrier is to the brits what LHD is to the americans

Troo faxs: LHDs are actually CVEs in disguise.

Combustible, vulnerable, and expendable!?

[NGTM-1R]

Combustible, vulnerable, and expendable!?

Yup.

[Dragon]

Carriers are going to be part of some form of a CVBG.  They aren't interdicting pirates off Somalia by themselves.  If some asshole manages to get close enough to shoot it with a shoulder rocket then there has been a massive failure at all levels of the battle group.  That's the entire point of escorts.  Hell, after the Cole incident even in a harbor there should be an umbrella of protection between that ship and some RPG toting nut.

It's nice to know Sea Whiz can pick it up if necessary but treating it like a credible scenario is silly.  If the RN actually allowed their flagship to get RPG'd then Horatio Nelson's corpse would rise from his sarcophagus trudge down to the Admiralty building and start slapping people with his one good arm.

Yeah, but we were discussing the viability of using CIWS against RPGs in general. It's obvious that this particular ships is probably never going to be shot at with anything, much less an RPG.

Troo faxs: LHDs are actually CVEs in disguise.

Actually, an LHD is specifically meant to carry helicopters and STOVL aircraft, while a proper CVE or CVL should be able to carry normal naval aircraft. That's pretty much the only difference, though.

[StarSlayer]

We have evidence that Sea Whiz can plink RPGs even with little heads up time, that was covered a while back. 


As for the LHD, you could probably still launch and recover F4Fs off it.  Does that count? 

[NGTM-1R]

Actually, an LHD is specifically meant to carry helicopters and STOVL aircraft, while a proper CVE or CVL should be able to carry normal naval aircraft. That's pretty much the only difference, though.

See, your assumption is invalid considering the entire existence of the CVH category (Moskva and the Essexes at the end of their service lives) and the fact the Brits deployed only STVOL aircraft off their Invincibles which were generally considered CVs.

There have long been plans to deploy the Wasp LHDs with "Sea Control" complements that are heavy on the Harriers and a small ASW helicopter complement, in effect creating small CVs. It's also been suggested to deploy them with only a couple of Harrier flights and all the SH-60s that could be scrounged up, to provide a significantly darker sky for convoy escort, thus meeting the classic CVE role. Both of these have been done in exercises.

[Dragon]

The fact that Invincibles launched only STOVL aircraft doesn't mean they couldn't launch normal ones. Essex-class carriers that server as helo carriers were renamed Boxer-class, which were LPHs. Moskva is a Russian vessel and thus hard to classify under the western system (Russian navy has a vastly different way of doing things than NATO). All other helo carrier classes were called "Amphibious Assault Ship" or some variation (LHD, LPH, LHA...). No carriers in there, sorry. Oh, and Harrier is a STOVL plane. My point still stands. The Wasp-class can indeed function like an escort carrier with proper loadout, but that alone doesn't make it a CV.

[The E]

The fact that Invincibles launched only STOVL aircraft doesn't mean they couldn't launch normal ones.

Actually, it does. Without arrestor gear or catapults, launching conventional aircraft is kinda impossible when your flight deck is only 168 meters long.

[NGTM-1R]

You seem to want to limit the definition of "aircraft carrier" to STOBAR and CATOBAR ships only, but there isn't a single naval authority in the world who would agree with that definition. An aircraft carrier is a ship outfitted to carry and launch large numbers of aircraft. That's the definition everyone in the world but you uses, and the STVOL/VTOL carrier has been a recognized form of it since the Moskvas and includes some fairly important ships down the years in the Italian, Japanese, Indian, and Spanish navies.

They're not quite as capable as STOBAR ships, but they're more than sufficient to fulfill the traditional roles of carrier-as-fleet-escort: providing ASW aircraft and yeoman CAP. The difference between VSTOL and STOBAR ships in role and even capability is minimal. The real divide in carrier capability is between VSTOL/STOBAR and CATOBAR carriers, as the latter are capable of launching aircraft that are carrying heavy bombloads for strike work and hence can serve the carrier-as-power-projection role.

If you were going to make a "these are not aircraft carriers" argument you chose the worst possible place to put the dividing line.

[StarSlayer]

I want to be a bird farm too!

[Phantom Hoover]

apparently they also won't have any escorts

[NGTM-1R]

apparently they also won't have any escorts

There are six Type 45s and two QE's; they'll have a decent screen, though the 45's magazines are a little small.

[headdie]

tbh though, I think we are going through a period of naval evolution.  In the current political climate there is little need for the traditional battle group as advanced nation vs advanced nation is unlikely due to both the economic implications and domestic political implications, making smaller deployments against low tech threats just as effective as a CBG with numerous frigates, destroyers and subs while allowing greater flexibility in deployment.

Also the UK and Europe is entering a phase of close co-operation in order to save cost while maintaining effectiveness, for example French and UK forces have on and off spent most of this year on joint training ops of one level or another in order to better facilitate future joint operations.

[General Battuta]

tbh though, I think we are going through a period of naval evolution.  In the current political climate there is little need for the traditional battle group as advanced nation vs advanced nation is unlikely due to both the economic implications and domestic political implications, making smaller deployments against low tech threats just as effective as a CBG with numerous frigates, destroyers and subs while allowing greater flexibility in deployment.

Also the UK and Europe is entering a phase of close co-operation in order to save cost while maintaining effectiveness, for example French and UK forces have on and off spent most of this year on joint training ops of one level or another in order to better facilitate future joint operations.

I am reading a book about how this is exactly what people were saying before WWI :tinfoil:

[StarSlayer]

Might as well dust off the Sumner/Gearings.  Old 5-inch shells and 40mm Bofors would probably be the closest cost effective weapon for chasing pirates.