*blocks your path*

*blocks your path*

Attached: navycarrier.jpg (960x471, 49K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/89Mw6L69b6Y
youtube.com/watch?v=zW3YB2ptGws
twitter.com/AnonBabble

*flies throught that arc

Attached: pic_p700_1.jpg (600x222, 19K)

If you miss you hit the super structure which it the entire reason it hangs off the side the way it does.

Want prevents carrier designs like this? I'm not talking money or it potentially making someone look like a warmonger to commission it, but is their any technological or structural limitations to make super sized nuclear carriers like this?

*breaks*

Attached: DFB5A3AC-7D93-4B41-B268-6CEBA122735D_w1597_r0_s.jpg (1597x1066, 218K)

US Carriers have to stay small enough to make it through the Panama canal

Flexing from the waves under it, Nimitz class super carriers already do this.
In choppy water if you look down a long passageway you can see it flex.

Jesus.

Those are the only 2 considerations I could think of, for sake of arguement if they made the carrier region locked to a part of the world (permanent stationing in certain oceans so Panama canal is a non issue) if we could make a material that was flexible enough yet rigid enough to allow both halfs to flex independent while the central bridges kept them together allowing movement of airframes, equipment and personal, what kind of benefits would a carrier like that offer?

youtu.be/89Mw6L69b6Y

This
Better to have two carriers that can actually maneuver and give you greater coverage.
Super carriers most likely won't get much bigger than the Ford class, perhaps a bit longer to raise take off weight if fighters get bigger.

How would a super carrier (this will sound ridiculous but it's a wet dream if mine) that's two carriers a kilometer long both sides attached with bridges to allow aircraft to move between the two that also has a small wet dock to resupply ships in the center and also to house a small sub fleet for localized defense work? Think about it, at that size you could launch pretty much any air frame in the United states arsenal and have a huge loiter time in an area before having to go to port to restock

Kinda like this, dont really like the render but best example of what I'm talking about and yes I'm fully aware this is beyond reality but fuck would it make me diamonds

Attached: bf06dde27c214f47ecffe18f73307702.jpg (640x396, 58K)

I know this design is intentional but AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>not going full gup

The material you're thinking of is steel. It still wont help this retarded idea. Our current carrier sizes are good enough. Bigger isn't better, but having a bunch of carriers of the ford size is always better.

still more functional than the ford lol

Dont get me wrong it's a hat on ass retarded idea but even if it was just a political show peice that never saw action itd make my dick diamonds

Said goodnight..

Attached: Mig-31BM & Kh-47.jpg (1080x810, 33K)

thanks, i hate it

That's not true; anything after the Essex class in WW2 was too wide to fit through the old locks.

The new locks are apparently large enough (they're sized for supercargo/supertankers), but I'm not sure if there are height issues (there's a bridge over the canal).

To each their own, I have a hardon for oversized military equipment, it's why I live the IG in 40k itd pay any price for a baneblade its impractical in every consideration but just seeing one in person, fuckkk

Love*

*HMS queen elizibeth teleports behind it*
heh, nothin' personal yank
*decapitates with ramp*

*blocks your path*

Attached: Alexander-the-Great-VLCC[1].jpg (2073x1375, 136K)

Nobody's gonna make a retarded waste of money and resources like that all because some retard likes to larp about being attracted to boats.

It's still the same from the pilot's perspective there, guy.

*sinks your fleet*

Attached: japanese dock.jpg (1023x575, 60K)

>Teleports behind you.
“Nothing personal, kid”.

Attached: C92A66EB-B217-44EB-A610-E5493D0A20B4.jpg (3938x2625, 510K)

What are they going to use as a ski jump now?

Sell it to the Ukraine and then act completely shocked when it's used against them.

>Implying you can teleport behind a scrapheap inside a HAS

Dont kink shame me nigger I like em big and thicc

>be USA
>has access to Atlantic and Pacific
>cares about panamax shit
lol no

Needing to sail around South America if you need a lot of ships in one ocean is a bitch tho.

Catamaran hull can't do S-curves well. Keep supercarriers as monohulls. If you insist on multihull vessels, go with a Joint Mobile Offshore Base built like oil platforms.

Attached: JMOB.jpg (719x539, 78K)

That's the only issue. If things got crazy enough that carriers needed to move into a different ocean, it would take some time. They would also obviously need to sail with their escorts.
It would be one hell of a naval battle going on if the US really had to start shuffling things around that much to pile its power into one ocean.

Is there some form of shock absorption that prevents it from flexing to much?

Attached: B1313E0C-0DB6-464D-8C1F-E8112820B1E1.jpg (499x948, 63K)

Suez canal*
Carriers don't go through the Panama Canal.

So they got the crane off?

Attached: 69DC4101-E1E9-4702-9757-F777EF09D9C8.png (1334x750, 3M)

Only the steel structure, and the water around it. The further it goes the greater the stress in the steel, which resists the forces progressively more as it bends. Thankfully it's fairly predictable so it can be designed for, but it's important to keep careful checks across the life of the ship.

Hauled it with the Vladillac

>three times more expensive
>Can't dock anywhere
>Flight Deck Ops are stupidly difficult with two traps
>Ship's company and airwing are twice as big, meaning twice as many pregnancies, potential for gangs, shipboard fires, fucking in fan rooms, more food to fuck up

>blocks your path

Attached: cleaned that destroy out of the ocean.jpg (800x488, 55K)

The Russian carrier has no boiler, and can’t leave it’s port becuase it’s former drydock is blocking the exit. Suck russian penis elsewere

>you third shift starboard hull squids are gonna pay
Here's a standard carrier maneuver that catamaran can't do. Since it's ongoing doctrine, it won't change.

Attached: USSAbrahamLincolnBeingAwesome.jpg (1280x720, 129K)

>pregnancies and fucking in fan rooms
People with genitals sometimes fuck. Don't be jealous.
t. fucked different girls in different generator rooms

>Muffled deja vu

Please don't.

t. squid occifer that has NJP'd multiple squadron members for fraternization.

no
give me land-based aircraft carriers

Attached: area88-landcarrier.jpg (774x498, 271K)

Alright. Just because you said please.

>land based carrier
An airfield?

airfields can't move, gaybrain

What do spec ops guys do?
In every war they've existed they build a makeshift airfield behind enemy lines so they can land supplies for operation.
But no let's build a retardedly expensive one on giant tank treads for no reason.

If you're going to take the subject seriously realize it's retarded.

Have you never closely watched a steel roller coaster track as a train goes along it? Those things flex a ton, it's intentional.

>being this much of a faggot

Low pressure hover skirts make way more sense than treads — and it's still a stupid idea.

Look into the concept for Mobile offshore base. It's the closest thing you are going to get, even though it's less a boat and more a series of platforms rigged together to create a runway.

Attached: JMOB.jpg (1556x1050, 367K)

>Hydroelastic tank testing by the U.S.Navy
I bet I know where that pic was taken
>BWX Technologies of Arlington, Va.
yeah I know exactly where

sleep tight, 70s tech

Attached: USS_John_Paul_Jones_(DDG-53)_launches_RIM-174_June_2014.jpg (2592x3888, 2.04M)

I was actually gonna say something of "well what if you just made it a massive platform that could be towed in sections to an area of operation and build it there as a massive offshore airfield/base of operations" but I figured everyone wouldve reeed didnt realize it was a real concept though neat

Don't mix the male crews with the female crews you autist. Keep it gender=ship.

What's the point of that maneuver?

It is definitely not.

>Some sort of non maneuverable missile against tech copied from China

lolwut, they can't even fight back against an Su-24 with ECW and you think they have a chance against an air launched DF-21 copy?

YOU CARR THAT CARRIER?

Attached: chink supercarrier.jpg (1585x541, 306K)

>Still has ski ramps
Yep.

Just like in my animes

Attached: GenoCyberPer.png (720x480, 392K)

>SM-6 Speed Mach 3.5 Flight ceiling 34,000 m
>The Russian Iskander-M travels at a hypersonic speed of 2100–2600 m/s (Mach 6–7) and an altitude of 50 km
Lol. But wait, that's not all.
>70s tech
>Kh-32, an upgrade of 1962 cruise missile, Speed Mach 5 Flight ceiling 40,000 m
Why does american SAM technology such so bad?

Attached: mig-31 with kh-47m2 kinzhal.jpg (1500x1013, 491K)

Are you implying a SAM can't hit something faster than it is?

>*amines

SM-3 has a ceiling of at least 900km and a speed of mach 15
Your argument is moot

Attached: USS_Lake_Erie_(CG-70)_SM-3_start.jpg (3504x2336, 683K)

SM-3 is exo-atmospheric, retard.

>don't give up the ship
fucking milfags i swer

>VLS right next to a bell
heh.

Why the hell are you assuming the SAM is chasing the ASM?

USS Lake Erie so it makes sense

You don't need a longer catapult for heavier aircraft (well not significantly). You launch a 32k lb F-18 in the same distance as a 68k lb F-14. It's also the same distance used for prop aircraft, which requires less help. You can make the catapults stronger, but might have to make it slightly longer to add to the water breaks that stop the catapult.

>Your argument is moot
>moot
>m
>o
>o
>t
MOOT IS WHAT

they can calibrate the catapult for the weight of the bird especially with different combat loads

>comparing speed and flight ceilings of a surface to air missile, ballistic missile, and air launched cruise missile

not sure if butthurt or just retarded

Attached: Standard_Missile_III_SM-3_RIM-161_test_launch_04017005.jpg (1200x1800, 855K)

>they can't even fight back against an Su-24 with ECW

Citation needed

SM-3 is exo-atmospheric, retard.

Attached: su-24m black sea.jpg (2800x1854, 1.1M)

if you want us to start shooting your planes down during peacetime let us know

Attached: 5bdf8d53fc7e9313738b4655.jpg (900x506, 134K)

I'm not even him, moron, I just posted a picture since you asked for a citation.

>still parroting a story with an original source being some russian blog
pathetic

the fake story about su24. the most pathetic story for random pidorashka

youtube.com/watch?v=zW3YB2ptGws

”I solemnly swear,
To devote my life and ability,
In defense of the United Nations of Earth,
To defend the Constitution of Man,
And to further the universal rights of all sentient life,
From the depths of the Pacific,
To the edge of the galaxy,
For as long as I, shall, live.”

Attached: NATO in Space.jpg (1276x683, 71K)

>the most pathetic story for random pidorashka
Then why did you post it?

>Thinking I need a woman to fuck

I'm pretty sure I coined this term in a different thread. Thank you for using it.

*blocks you path in an alternate reality we all wish we lived in*

Attached: 1415971577042.jpg (1280x960, 244K)

>takes off flight deck
>400mm guns go off pretty much at the same time
>extra lift boost, nice
>never mind my internal bleeding
It's retarded, but I like it.

Attached: 1415971470101.jpg (1653x507, 74K)

in after mess-making Ruskies trying to build hatred between China and the West

*at-this-point-everything-is-a-mashup blocks your path*

Attached: 1416043992857.jpg (650x374, 37K)

Stress test in the pic but evasive maneuver

Catamarans are terrible in rough seas, the wide "stance" and separate hulls mean they roll side to side much more than a normal single-hull design. Putting a runway on top of one of those hulls would make it pretty much useless in anything but smooth water.

*anger in french*

Attached: L.jpg (900x619, 52K)

Why can't they just sail the North West passage or around the tip of South America?