Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Trimaran Carrier Concept
perfectgeneral    7/25/2004 10:34:58 PM
Given the drop in drag it offers and the large ratio of deck space to hull required a tri-hull carrier is bound to come off the drawing boards and into production soon. Something all electric or nuclear. Magnetic catapalt. loads of lifts and decks. Huge. I did wonder about a row of four 40 metre wide decks, each 230metres long, running diagonally in parallel along a 400 metre deck. Islands fore and aft would occupy the opposite diagonal corners. The port hull supports the front of the aft two decks and the starboard hull the rear of the foreward two decks. The four lifts alternate between optimised for take-off and landing on each deck. This is too big for existing facilities but could be assembled from modular hull and deck units. The three hulls would be launched separately. Then the hulls would be joined with additional superstructure and decking in the water. The central hull would have to be partially flooded to attain the correct level. Any comments on the feasability of all this? Any Trimaran Carrier ideas of your own?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4
leerw    RE:Sea Basing   4/7/2005 8:27:05 AM
EW3 laat time I checked islands don't move! The whole point of the seabase concept is to avoid situtations like Turkey (our supposed ally) NOT letting us over/through their territory. Also the seabase is intended to be 50 to 125 miles offshore of objective area and will directly support troops ashore. Neither Guam nor Diego Garcia are anywhere within a 1000 nmi of a land mass. Okinawa would help IF the anit-war Japanese let us use it. Seabase is suppose to be big enough to house crews onboard.
 
Quote    Reply

leerw    RE:Sea Basing   4/7/2005 8:31:36 AM
The Seabase is expected to be a group of ships linked to/supported by MPF-F and HSVs. There may be up to three Seabases (TBD), and still a seabase will cost less and take less time to build will be than a CVN. Haven't you seen the CVN(X) being pushed out of navy budget? Look at CNO posture statement for FY06 no carrier mentioned seabase and MPF-F and HSVs are planned.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics