Is a flying aicraft carrier possible?

"El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First!" (lightningzone) 01/01/2014 at 19:05 • Filed to: Planelopnik

1

23

Should somebody atempt to build one ?

Nuclear powered, capable to carry jets and cruise missiles...

Not sure that even a big spender like the US military would be crazy enough to pour all that money into a flagship like that.

But with the Cold War 2, opposing the US and EU on one side and China and Russia with it's pet states, on the other, a weapons system able to fly quickly around the world, and wreak havoc, in certain hotspots, could prove valuable.

Bighead38 > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:09

0

This is awesome. Such a cool idea.

Leadbull > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:09

1

Brian Silvestro > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:09

0

Ace Combat 6. That's where that's from. I have nothing else to contribute. I'm sorry.

gmctavish needs more space > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:10

0

I badly want this one to be a thing

Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:11

0

The problem is how you're going to find a landing space and the sheer funds spent on refueling the damn thing.

Bad Idea Hat > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:11

1

Been done already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Macon…

shpuker > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:11

4

Possible yes. Will it happen? No. It's far too vulnerable. Impossible to hide on radar, impossible to miss when you look up, hard target to miss.

Sunray09 > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:12

0

Its possible but I would bet on a drone carrier and recovery mothership being needed first. A way to carry a drone...and recover it..or a cruise missile launch and deploy and then a flying airbourne recovery method. Flys to a designated altitude and orbits..and is either picked up or told to destroy itself.

daender > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:13

1

We sorta had one? I believe this thing could launch a half-dozen planes but probably no way for them to reattach until they reached an airstrip.

Victorious Secret > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:14

2

This is a brilliant idea till a rail gun or larger accelerator cannon points up and knocks it out with a single shot.

A projectile that you can't defend against using CIWS or electronic countermeasures.

Dusty Ventures > shpuker 01/01/2014 at 19:15

3

That's what I was thinking too. Way easier to take down than a naval aircraft carrier, and when it goes it's going to go in seconds and take everyone with it. No lifeboats, no means of escape, no chance of launching any planes, and it's going to take anyone in the crash zone along with it.

N/A POWAAAHH > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:15

0

The airflow would be too wonky to make this possible. Or if they were to slow it down to make it more stable, it wouldn't generate enough lift

E30Joe drives a Subaru > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:20

1

Looks like somebody just watched the Avengers.

El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! > Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura 01/01/2014 at 19:21

0

If it will be light, made out of carbon fiber or carbon nanobutes, it will be light and fuel efficient, and could take off from water like a hydroplane, or even vertically, like F35.

shpuker > Dusty Ventures 01/01/2014 at 19:22

2

Exactly. Just sounds like a really expensive way to lose a few hundred men really quickly.

Jayhawk Jake > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:24

0

Possible? Maybe, but not like this. Should it be done? Hell no.

Look up Project FICON or TOM TOM for an idea of how you could do it. I did a write up about them a while ago on here, about parasite fighters.

It would be pointless to find an atmospheric solution, more sensible would be foldable drones launched from an ICBM system or a satellite. In my opinion manned fighters should be obsolete within 20 years, but they won't go away unfortunately

All Motor Is Best Motor > daender 01/01/2014 at 19:28

0

I saw a show about this on tv once. They couldn't control the planes well enough at low speeds to be able to reattatch. The idea was scrapped after the thing crashed or something like that.

MountainCommand > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 19:35

0

you reminded me of the Titans in BF2142....

We probably have to get defense systems down to a perfect artform before we build anything bigger than a carrier though. But i hope i get to see something much larger than a carrier in my lifetime. So they got some work to do.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > shpuker 01/01/2014 at 21:12

1

TL:DR I was in the Navy and I think a flying carrier is interesting but probably impractical and unlikely.

I was a Navy Nuke spent a bit of time on the USS Eisenhower, although most of my "career" was on submarines. Ships compliment on the Ike was about 3,000 people - that's just to run the thing and make it sail. Add an airwing and you're talking 5,000 people onboard.

Now granted you probably wouldn't put a full airwing on a flying carrier, that's about 90 planes, but for it to be any kind of effective I'd imagine you'd want roughly half that. So you're still talking roughly 1,000 people.

As I think about this more, I'd envision a flying carrier as more of a rapid strike craft - something that can take off and fly to a hot spot, deploy ~40 aircraft while loitering to support multiple rapid strike missions for a few days until a Naval carrier can be on scene. You could eliminate a lot of fluff that we had on the surface ship, like a ship store, a barber, etc. The advent of things like magnetic catapults and arresting gear eliminate a lot of headaches and reduce manning further. But realistically you're still looking at 1,500 to 2,000 people, I'd think, to support the mission round the clock.

I can tell you the biggest headache is nuclear power - its a blessing and a curse. On one hand, its about the only way you can realistically make this thing fly with any kind of efficiancy and without carrying a bazillion gallons of fuel (that's a technical term). On the other hand, you'd have a lot of challenges with regards to cooling the thing and providing water to run the reactor. Reactors need a lot of water. That's why naval reactors work well and nuclear plants are usually built near bodies of water.

The other thing is you'd need a high degree of automation. The Navy, I can tell you from experience, distrusts technology for reactor operation. They believe, and I think rightly so, that a well trained operator is more flexible and better choice to operate a reactor. Most of the big accidents (3 Mile, Chernobyl) were a result of combination improper training and reliance on technological fail safes. For something like a flying Nuke plant, you're going to want the pinnacle of safety.

That brings up one last issue - airspace. You're pretty much only going to be able to operate this thing over water. A lot of countries are reluctant and some outright refuse to let surface nuclear vessels to tie up in their ports, so I don't think anyone is going to let this thing fly over their territory.

So I think honestly, you're pretty much left with a Naval aircraft carrier in that its limited to the same regions of operation, but can react faster, although is more limited in its capacity to deliver fighting craft. You also lose some tactical flexibility such as deploying helicopters, you probably wouldn't have an infirmary so you can't use it for alternate functions like as a hospital. And as mentioned, you are going to have issues with crew survivability, and it's a big damn target.

I think the military has an array of capabilities at the moment and some other things in the works that pretty much overlap the capabilities you'd get from a flying carrier. You have things like B-52's and SSGN subs to deliver cruise missiles for rapid strikes, and aircraft carriers for more sustained strike capability. You also have projects in the works like the Air Forces hypersonic strike system which could deploy land based cruise missiles from regional locations that can strike targets thousands of miles away within an hour.

shpuker > Snuze: Needs another Swede 01/01/2014 at 21:20

0

Very well put. I guess in the end you'd have one helluva potential for a massive ass bomb though.

KillerRaccoon - Group J's Sébastien Loeb > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/01/2014 at 21:34

0

I don't think that's too possible. It's all about lift/weight ratio, and when you start getting that big, volume, and thus mass, increase WAY faster than lift (mass goes up by roughly a cube of the dimensions, whereas lift goes up by roughly the square). Maybe mini-carriers, where you have one huge-ass bomber with a few detachable fighters, and there is always the Zeppelin idea (read: crimson skies), but a giant winged aircraft carrier? Not too feasible.

Makoyouidiot > El Relámpago(LZone) - Humanity First! 01/02/2014 at 10:45

0

Carbon fiber/nanotube skin and frame, lift generating body form and wings, multiple armored helium tanks to help with lift, turboprops for long loiter time. Make it able to launch and retrieve Predators and similar drones. Job done.

xxxxxx > E30Joe drives a Subaru 02/18/2014 at 15:42

0

Or played Ace Combat.