20# thenone RM berapa ribu ni? :D
yes, good question, where would the Russians get the money to pay for 12 carrier fleets?
Destabilise middle east and pump up gas prices?
21# malarky
tatau laa tu... kena nego laa rega ngn lego.. brapa depa mau jual.. tp yg ni kompem kalo beli uncle sam takkan downgrade spec punya.. ;P
Debunking Aircraft Carrier Myths Pt 3
http://newwars.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/america.jpg?w=600&h=386
USS America LHA-6 Artist's Conception
Summing up this week’s study of large versus small deck aircraft carriers, here are our conclusions:
* Large armored carriers are no less susceptible to battle damage than smaller ships and are harder to repair in wartime.
* The Navy’s insistence in buying only high-end Aegis anti-missile escorts reveals the service’s own doubts of the Big Ship’s survivability in combat.
* More numerous small carriers would take best advantage of the advances in precision bombing aircraft, manned or unmanned. Dispersed in adequate numbers, they would greatly enhance the Navy’s global presence.
* The benefits of nuclear power is counteracted by its drawbacks such as greatly multiplying the cost for individual ships, which in turn reduces the number of carrier purchases, ensuring a smaller fleet less available for global commitments. The dangers of radiation, whether perceived or real, also alienate even our closest allies during random port visits by ships so equipped.
* Any aviation capable ship is an asset to a Navy.
* With cheaper aircraft carriers, precious defense funds can be diverted to improving naval aircraft in quality and especially increasing their numbers, which is the sole reason for the carrier’s existence.
With the basics covered, here is our modest proposal for a future conventional carrier:
America Class Medium Carrier
Some might contend that the cost of a smaller conventional carrier isn’t much less than of a full sized nuclear supercarrier.With a new Marine carrier like the USS America coming in at $3 billion, this is not an exaggerated statement. We think the high cost of America and her sisters are the product of lack of competition in US shipyards as well as the ongoing mismanagement. With a drastic overhaul of shipbuilding practices, greater competition, even building ships in foreign yards, big savings could incur, perhaps bringing us closer to the $1 billion mark.
As a Marine amphibious warship, USS America is already well-protected against damage, even from a nearby nuclear blast. Geared specifically toward aviation support, she is already equipped with spacious hangars to accept F-35B V/STOL version of the Joint Strike Fighter. With the addition of a ski ramp, she could operate the higher performance F-36C, or even the venerable F/A-18 Hornet.
Ex-Soviet carrier Varyag would resemble ski-jump USS America in size and appearance.
http://newwars.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/varyag21.jpg?w=600&h=268
Ex-Soviet carrier Varyag would resemble ski-jump USS America in size and appearance.
The airwing would consist of 3 squadrons of 12 planes each, for 36 fighters, a mix of F/A-18 Super Hornets and the F-35C Lightning II JSF as the latter becomes available. Since all carriers typically sail with helicopter equipped escorts, the need for an ASW wing would be negated, save for a few utility choppers. The electronic warfare “Grizzly” complement might be reduced to 2, as would the EW Hawkeyes, though certainly no more than 3, and perhaps advances in technology might integrate the essential missions of both aircraft.
If costs can be reined in, here is what the future USN carrier force may look like:
* 10 America class CVV Medium Aircraft Carriers
* 5 of the more recent Nimitz class CVN supercarriers
* 12 LHA/LHD amphibious aircraft carriers
All this would consist of an easier to maintain carrier fleet, whose aviation assets, whether traditional manned jets or unmanned combat aerial vehicles can be built in adequate numbers and affordably replaced as needed. Further savings would be channeled into the general purpose operating forces. Long-neglected small escort ships, newer littoral ships, submarines, ect. could then be built up into a more balanced fleet, instead the top heavy force the USN currently deploys, wholly tied to supporting the handful of Big Deck supercarriers. Finally future naval strategists could think beyond the modest “313 ship fleet” and to a larger 450-500-600 ship force, with vital numbers more fitting a worldwide force for good as the US Navy.
NAZI GERMAN PUNYE
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Graf-Zeppelin-1.jpg
China Aircraft Carriers
http://bp1.blogger.com/_0HCJq6B1wZA/RrYv9HgV2SI/AAAAAAAAAXQ/XOmBmPWdg8k/s400/Varyag+2.jpg
http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/va2.jpg
http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/va1.jpg
http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz205/warpig_2009/Varyag%20Deconstruction/VaryagIslandCloseup.jpg
China develops flying aircraft carrier
As any defence expert will tell you, the aircraft carrier if one of the most potent weapons available to the modern international superpower - capable of raining fiery death on less well-endowed nations from a safe distance. They do have one shortcoming, however: getting close enough to launch swarms of angry aircraft can takes days, if not weeks, of urgent steaming.
The solution? Simple: develop an aircraft carrier which can itself take majestically to the skies and put down in any suitable body of water:
http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/11/16/flying_aircraft_carrier.jpg
China's flying aircraft carrier
This remarkable vessel is currently moored on a lake near Shanghai. We assume that its vast, 220-metre-long body is levitated by the previously-theoretical hyperdrive, since that's certainly the only tech capable of lifting this particular behemoth:
http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/11/16/flying_aircraft_carrier_clo.jpg
A close-up view of the flying aircraft carrier
Interestingly, while the Chinese have evidently made a great leap forward in advanced propulsion systems, they let the US of A do all of the legwork on the ship's basic design:
The USS Nimitz in San Diego
http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/11/16/uss_nimitz.jpg
Yes indeed, that's the non-levitating USS Nimitz at anchor in San Diego - an uncanny resemblance, we're sure you'll agree.
In summary, those readers who live by the sea, or any reasonably large lake or river should keep their eyes peeled for unscheduled flying aircraft carrier landings, presumably preceded by black helicopter reconaissance flights.
Post Last Edit by thenone at 2-3-2010 17:20
salah gambor.. sory
The Tripoli, a US Navy Iwo Jima class helicopter carrier
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/USS_Tripoli_LPH10_a.jpg
agaknya Dokdo versi mesia sebesar ni jek kut untuk 4 buah heli?
Dari beli AC baik beli Destroyer, baru nampak gerun, takat AC kalau pihak musuh ade platform AAW, tak guna gak feter2 atas AC tu tapi kalau Destroyer, WOW~ kekeke ;P
Dari beli AC baik beli Destroyer, baru nampak gerun, takat AC kalau pihak musuh ade platform AAW, tak guna gak feter2 atas AC tu tapi kalau Destroyer, WOW~ kekeke ;P
rastablank Post at 2-3-2010 19:11 http://mforum2.cari.com.my/images/common/back.gif
ade AC ni nak menunjukkan satu2 navy tu ade offensive capability dan capability utk Blue water navy....which is boleh deploy forces accross their border line limitation....:D
Yup betul, sebagai force projection tapi still aku tak gerun dengan AC, sedangkan submarine China timbul sebelah AC USA pun tak sedar, senang sangat nak sabotage~ :P
Yup betul, sebagai force projection tapi still aku tak gerun dengan AC, sedangkan submarine China timbul sebelah AC USA pun tak sedar, senang sangat nak sabotage~ :P
rastablank Post at 2-3-2010 20:02 http://mforum2.cari.com.my/images/common/back.gif
yup...that's y kena ade escort destroyer....sedangkan china punye sub pon boleh intai ex carat yg x disedari oleh Aegies class destroyer US:lol:
betuk semenanjung ni dah ada iras2 aircraft carrier kekdahnya...;P
tinggal nak beli kapal terbang je lagi....;P
Sayangnyer AEGIS Destroyer US itu bukan sebagai ASW, dengar platform AEGIS pun kita bleh tau function dia sebagai AAW~
http://www.voodoo-world.cz/ww2car/pics/new3/akagi001.jpg
http://www.voodoo-world.cz/ww2car/pics/new1/akagi1.jpg
AKAGI (1927)
Shipyard: Kure Dockyard
Keel Laid: December 6, 1920
Launched: April 22, 1925
Entered service: March 25, 1927
Displacement: 26,900 tons (standard); 34,364 tons (full)
Complement: 1630
Length: 261,2m
Beam: 28,96m
Draught: 8,08m
Flight deck:
1. 190,2x30,48m for landings
2. 15x30m only for fighters
3. 55,02x22,86m for bombers
Hnagar deck: -
Elevators: 2 (13x12m, 13x9m)
Aircraft:60
Guns:
10 - 203mm
12 - 127mm
Armour:
Main Side Belt 11" belt
Deck Armour 0.5" to 2.3"
Flight Deck Armour 1.5"
Speed: 32,5 knots
Machinery: 4 geared turbines Gihon type. 11 Oil Boilers, 8 Coal Boilers. S.H.P.131,200.
Fuel: Coal 2100t + oil 3900 t.
AKAGI (1935-38)(1941)
Shipyard: Kure Dockyard
Sasebo Kaigun Kosho - rebuilding 1935-38
Keel Laid: December 6, 1920
Launched: April 22, 1925
Entered service: March 25, 1927
Displacement: 36,500 tons (standard); 41,300 tons (full)
Complement: 1630
Length: 855.3 ft (260,67m)
Beam: 102.9 ft (31,32m)
Draught: 28.7 ft (8,71m)
Flight deck: 249,2x30m
Hnagar deck: 188x22,7m
Elevators: 3 (11x16m, 11x13m, 13x9m)
Aircraft:91
Guns:
6 - 203mm
12 - 127mm
28 - 25mm
Armour:
Main Side Belt 11" belt
Deck Armour 0.5" to 2.3"
Flight Deck Armour 1.5"
Speed: 31,2 knots
Machinery: Geared turbines. 19 Kanpon Boilers B type. S.H.P.133,000.
Fuel: Oil 5770 t.
Post Last Edit by thenone at 4-3-2010 22:32
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/images/russia/kuzn-2.jpg
Kuznetsovclass multirole aircraft carriers
Displacement: 67,000 tons full load
Dimensions: 984 x 124.5 x 36 feet/300 x 38 x 11 meters
Extreme Dimensions: 990 x 239 x 36 feet/301.8 x 72.8 x 11 meters
Propulsion: Steam turbines, 8 boilers, 4 shafts, 200,000 hp, 30 knots
Crew: 1500 plus air wing
Armor: uncertain; probably little or none
Armament: 16 SS-N-19 Shipwreck SSM, 18 8-cell SA-N-9 Gauntlet SAM VLS, 8 CADS-1 CIWS (each 2 30mm gatling AA plus 16 SA-N-11 SAM),6 AK-630 30 mm gatling AA, 2 RBU-12000 ASW rocket launchers
Aircraft: approx. 30Concept/Program: The first true Soviet carriers, intended for overseas deployments, intervention, etc. in the manner of US carriers.An adventurous design, but not fully successful.The second ship was left incomplete following the breakup of the USSR.
Design: Generally based on the Kiev hull but withsignificant enlargement and improvements.Full flight deck, angledlanding deck, but a ski-jump is fitted instead of catapults, due tofailures in the catapult development program.Extremely heavy missilearmament, including heavy SSMs in VLS set into the flight deck.Intendedto operate navalized versions of regular Soviet fighter and attackaircraft, plus naval helicopters.Aviation features are reported to be poorly designed.The ship uses the Kiev machinery and has suffered machinery problems.
Operational: Did not become operational until 1995.Has made only one deployment, and the possibility of future deployments is uncertain. Air wing was made up of Su-27 variants and variants of the standard Soviet/Russian shipboard helicopters.
betuk semenanjung ni dah ada iras2 aircraft carrier kekdahnya...;P
tinggal nak beli kapal terbang je lagi....;P
matamata Post at 2-3-2010 21:07 http://mforum2.cari.com.my/images/common/back.gif
Pulau Layang-Layang dah memang paling Seiras dengan Aircraft Carrier
Pulau Layang-Layang dah memang paling Seiras dengan Aircraft Carrier
HangPC2 Post at 5-3-2010 16:12 http://mforum2.cari.com.my/images/common/back.gif
ade gambar x hangpc????????
Russia's Aircraft Carrier will be developed by end 2010
Technical design of Russia's aircraft carrier will be developed by the end of 2010. This RIA Novosti reported with reference to the statement made by Chief of the Navy Vladimir Vysotsky. According to him, after the will identify key tactical and technical characteristics of the spacecraft, will begin development of working documents.
Vladimir Vysotsky said that development work on the creation of Russia's aircraft carrier already started. "In favorable circumstances, I think that by 2020, the ship could be launched," - declared Commander of the Navy. He also stressed that to build an aircraft carrier in the financing of the state defense order will be very difficult. According to Vysotsky, to achieve this task requires federal target program.
In February 2009 the Head of the state defense order the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC), Anatoly helmets said that Russia's new-generation aircraft carrier will be atomic. He also clarified that the ship will have a displacement of up to 60 thousand tons. According Shlemova, with plans to build three to six aircraft carriers.
In June, Vladimir Vysotsky said that the establishment of standard ships of this type has become bleak. That is why Russia will not build conventional aircraft carriers and naval aviation systems. According to the Commander in Chief of the Navy, they would include "space component, air, sea and advanced technologies in other areas."
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2010/03/russias-new-aircraft-carrier-will-be.html