>no A1B nuclear reactors, in fact, NO NUCLEAR REACTORS AT

File: super carriers.png (86KB, 919x483px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 919x483px

>Supercarrier is an unofficial descriptive term for the largest type of aircraft carrier, typically those displacing over 70,000 tons (64,000 metric tons).[1]

It's not hard

>>53776326
It has a ramp though.

File: 45654775876324.jpg (374KB, 1903x657px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1903x657px

>in the nation of "great" "brit" "ain"'t a helicopter is better than a long range high altitude radar station with advanced sensors

File: 2bd76c.jpg (118KB, 1554x905px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1554x905px

>china will start building real 21st century carriers within 10 years
>british cuckramp carriers aren't even under going trials yet


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JYWq2XwjOM

>>53776820
>within 10 years

It literally took them 10 years to convert an already finished hull to a shitty STOBAR carrier

File: 1635064_-_main.jpg (118KB, 752x423px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 752x423px

>>53777097

They are on track to have the capability to build multiple carriers per decade.

Pic related. Their first is under construction right now

File: 1fzmJRY.jpg (891KB, 4233x3000px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 4233x3000px

>>53776820
China confirmed for ramp master race

File: 1403982538414.gif (25KB, 197x254px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 197x254px

>using nuclear reactors when oil is $28 a barrel

>>53777554
>Liaoning 2: Electric Boogaloo

Still not nuclear. Still STOBAR. Still no fixed wing AWACs, EW or cargo aircraft. Still heavily restricted when it comes to the payload of their fighters.

And since Russia has come to a halt when it comes to naval projects, China won't do shit either

File: uclass.gif (2MB, 636x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 636x288px

A

FUCKING

RAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMPPPPPPPP

>>53780469
It's kinda sad how you have to keep bumping your own thread

i'm just glad that from now on USA, germany, and the UK will always be on the same team
:3

>>53777646
>no one in the cockpit

Britain in a nutshell.

>>53776662
looks like a bucket you fill up by dipping into the sea and fly to extinguish fires tb h

>>53780683
for how long?
those rapefugees are a gamechanger in the long tearm
:^)

>>53780910
uk is already both more muslim and more pro-muslim than germany

>>53780994
2 million changes a lot.

File: XcpgatT.jpg (1MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2000px

>yanks have so much debt they can't even afford a ramp
>can't even afford two towers
literally lmaoing

File: 20150110_gdc999_3[1].png (293KB, 1190x2188px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1190x2188px

>>53780994
Why are you lying?

Germany has a larger % of Muslims than the UK

>some autistic yank who posts this thread everyday
embarrassing desu

>>53781322
That was before the refugee crisis btw

>>53781206
why the two towers?

>>53781416
Needed extra room for all our state of the art technology

>>53781345
True. But your carriers are still a joke compared to ours.

Being top dog means we get to flatter ourselves by shitposting on our subordinates.

>>53781416
They are preparing for a plane crash.

File: 1420721431804.png (210KB, 567x440px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 567x440px

>>53781206

>yanks can't even afford two towers

Rofl.

>>53781416
1. Redundancy - if a tower is destroyed or damaged, the remaining tower can do both jobs

2. Less turbulence on the flight deck

3. Optimisation - the forward tower is better suited for navigation, the back tower is ideal for air traffic control

>>53781559
We only could build one as a replacement.

>>53778801
Okay. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Go kill yourself.

File: USAFpilots.jpg (56KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x376px

>be American pilot
>need a catapult just to get off the ground

>>53781689
Nice rebuttal, Wang

>>53781756
Your using nothing but assumptions, therefore your wrong.
The carrier isn't finished or even officially acknowledged. Either you give me a source or you should go kill yourself.

File: le exasperated green frog.jpg (11KB, 247x242px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 247x242px

>>53781545
> your carriers are still a joke compared to ours.
Yours are several times more expensive than our carriers, despite the advantages you gain from bigger economies of scale. If you spend a LOT more money on something you expect it to be better, don't you? You guys are so pathetic. It amounts to "haha your defence budget is smaller than ours"

>“We simply cannot afford to pay $12.9 billion for a single ship,” said McCain, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/10/01/why-john-mccain-called-this-13-billion-aircraft-carrier-a-spectacular-debacle/

>>53781586
>the forward tower is better suited for navigation

What millennia are we in?

>>53781917
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33153.pdf

Enjoy reading

>>53782475
Where is the citation on China's new carrier you faggot?

A FAS report from March 2015 isn't going to have anything to say about the new carrier.

>>53782594
It's from December, and there's a whole chapter dedicated to it, you humongous retard.

>>53782304
What does the current millennia have to do with the fact that a clear view of what's ahead is a good thing? There will be plenty of times when the carrier will be near ports and have to navigate around objects. Or what about if there are icebergs nearby?

It's amazing how annoyed the Americans get when your country doesn't copy them on everything

>>53782693
Okay. My apologies.

They also cite
>"....this carrier will be a tremendous increase in capability compared to the Liaoning..."

You called it the Liaoning 2.

China recently commisioned a J-15 EW variant. They are currently testing a small carrier borne AWACS. What cargo planes land on carriers? Oh, and it is expected that the newly designed catapult system will fix the inability to fully arm the J-15.

Hence the "tremendous increase in capability" quote.

>>53776820
Hahaha what a fucking joke. China uses ramps because they can't build engines strong enough to launch.

>>53781752
>Be British
>need Americans for everything

>>53776402
lol. the fact that the piece of shit in the op post can't function as carrier. The ships they call "supercarrier" is "functional carriers", and other ones are just memes. Their maximum usefulness is attack on unarmed sandniggers.

>>53776820
>Liaoning
>Originally laid down as the Admiral Kuznetsov class multirole aircraft carrier Riga for the Soviet Navy, she was launched on December 4, 1988, and renamed Varyag in 1990.

Wow nice Soviet technologies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_aircraft_carrier_Liaoning

File: huh.png (16KB, 560x407px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 560x407px

It's not just on /int/, the US media takes pleasure in shitting on us too. And like the American anons here, they lie and exaggerate to make us look bad. The Washington Post, one of the USA's most widely circulated newspapers, reacted to the result of the 2015 UK general election with this:

>Britain resigns as a world power
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/britain-resigns-as-a-world-power/2015/05/21/d89606f8-fff1-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

The author implies the UK will stop meeting its 2% GDP NATO obligations (it didn't happen), he hints that the British army will shrink to 50,000 (not happening), he says it *will* shrink to 80,000 (that's not true). He mocks RAF Tornados with a comment about their age and a comparison to the F-22s, despite the fact that Tornados are much better suited for that bombing role and that the RAF has much newer fighter aircraft (which is never mentioned)

The author also said there were more cuts to come to the BBC World Service, etc. That's another LIE, in fact the government increased its funding.

I'll tell you something for sure though. When the UK committed to increasing the size of its armed forces, and its presence abroad, that didn't get ANYTHING like this level of attention.

There are few things more pathetic in this world than the USA's peculiar complex with Britain. Americans seem so desperate for any chance to talk us down, it's messed up that a huge superpower with many times our resources should feel so insecure about a small island. But there you have it.

File: Aircraft_launching_from_USS_Nimitz_(CVN-68)_in_November_2014.jpg (2MB, 4928x3280px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4928x3280px

>>53783257
>What cargo planes land on carriers

It's literally one of if not the most important aircraft in a battle group.

It's the primary supply line between the fleet and land.

>>53784389
mate, the clappers mentality is all bout this: me best, everyone else is shit

>>53783701
sry to bring it to you mate but in the last view wars the brits and the US had it was always the US convincing the eternal anglo to join the war.
The US even failed to support the brits last major war of foreign aggression

>inb4 los malvinas son argentinos

>>53784521
>those shitty box planes are the fleet's primary supply source

Are you retarded? Tankers & replenishment ships are the primary supply source by a huge margin. Those planes are used to transport senior staff/medical cases and maybe mail.

File: carriers btfo.png (91KB, 1004x168px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1004x168px

>carriers
>worth investing in

>>53776326
so you take an old oil tanker split the white tower bit and move it to the side, put a freight elevator in,slap some tarmac on the deck and you have yourself a fancy new aircraft carrier?
Seriously the no nuclear reactor thing is retarded,you can incapacitate the ship just by attacking its numerous oil tenders and then you have to protect your fuel supply by diverting your support ships to them or forming a convoy, sounds like a nightmare desu

>>53784651
You can still have the "we are the best" attitude and not stoop to the levels that they do. Guess how the Wall Street Journal (the USA's highest circulating newspaper) reacted to the result of Labour's leadership election? That's right, it's

>"another milepost in Britain’s long decline"
http://www.wsj.com/articles/britains-unsettling-omen-1442272191

Despite the fact that Corbyn's win has *nothing* to do with the views of the wider British public and *everything* to do with how Ed Miliband changed the Labour Party's voting rules.

But "left-leaning Labour members have much more influence over their party" doesn't appeal to Americans like "another milepost in Britain's long decline". It's especially ironic because the consequence of this Labour leadership election will be to keep the lefties out of power for a long time, improving Britain's prospects

File: F-35A_Lightning_II_Joint_Strike_Fighter_Powerplant_on_display_at_Centenary_of_Military_Aviation_2014.jpg (303KB, 1920x1282px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1920x1282px

>>53784810
>Those planes are used to transport senior staff/medical cases and maybe mail.

Yeah who needs to transport those things.

And why would a carrier ever need the abiltiy to haul up to 5 tons to land and back.

>>53784997
I'm sure it will last quite a while on its fuel reserve and if your control over the water is that shitty I would wonder if the carrier is at the right place to begin with.

>>53784997
>Seriously the no nuclear reactor thing is retarded,you can incapacitate the ship just by attacking its numerous oil tenders

You're a fucking idiot. Do you think all the escort ships that must protect the nuclear-powered carrier are also nuclear-powered?

If you can destroy all the axillary supply ships then you've already destroyed the navy.

File: 1280769968795.jpg (36KB, 576x416px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 576x416px

>>53784854

>UKistanis fell for the carrier meme

File: 1390080047330.jpg (118KB, 1185x628px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1185x628px

>>53785372
can bareley lift a wiesel2 calls itself a "carrier"

>>53783903
Enlighten us Ivan, why can't our aircraft carrier function as an aircraft carrier?

>>53785781
because it doesnt leak radioactive waste,
how do you excpect a pilot to find the landing deck if it doesnt have this special glow?

File: 1448119431718.png (978KB, 1822x846px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 1822x846px

>>53784854
You fucking nigger have no idea

>>53784389
>Britain resigns as a world power

I wonder what the headline would have been if Labour had won the election?

>>53786343
>Britain resigns as a country

>>53784854
>surface fleets
>zero defense

lel. An US carrier battle group has a multi-layered air defense system. SM-3, SM-6, SM-2, ESSM, CIWS. And of course the carrier air wing with AA and EW capabilities.

>>53786437
Lel

This thread is the reason why there is no american meet up from /int/ in real life
Someone would start a heated discussion in a bar with everyone half pissed, he'd get mad and start shooting up the place

>>53786642
>meeting people from 4chan

No

>>53781416
one is a mosque

>>53784651
It's true though.

>>53786808
If the US is the best, why the need to lie and exaggerate about other much smaller countries?

File: RAF Akrotiri.jpg (458KB, 1501x970px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1501x970px

>>53783903
>Their maximum usefulness is attack on unarmed sandniggers.

We don't need ANY aircraft carriers to bomb the middle-east

>>53786808
>go to /k/
>all have the same mentality as you
>meanwhile they all own Glocks, H&Ks, FNs, Sig Sauers, Walthers and Berettas

can't make this shit up

File: d48.png (1MB, 2236x1356px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2236x1356px

>>53786642
>/brit/ meetup

>>53787242
what if you want to use more than 20 aircraft

>>53786139
>>53786461
even with all that, they still find holes in their defenses
such as the swedish submarine that found a way to sink an american carrier
they aren't invincible and it is a lot of sailors on one single boat

>>53786642

Have you seen the /k/ meetups?

They look like the most entertaining meetups out of all the boards or chan's.

>>53788431
>such as the swedish submarine that found a way to sink an american carrier

>in an exercise with a large part of the detection systems turned off

>>53787046
Because irritating you is funny.

>>53788588
so america is a made entirely of manchildren?

>>53788639
No, most of us have jobs unlike the Spanish people.

>>53788531
yeah lol keep believing that it's invincible
then actual war happens and they start sinking

File: 1106402[1].jpg (192KB, 1200x812px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1200x812px

>>53788271
>what if you want to use more than 20 aircraft
RAF Akrotiri is a large airbase. In the 1960s we kept four squadrons of Canberras (pic related) stationed there. We also have RAF Al Udeid in Qatar, where we currently keep logistics and intelligence aircraft but it has housed fighters in the past.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Al_Udeid

The reason why we have few fighters operating from Cyprus today is not to do with capacity, it's because we have a long-term low-intensity operation.

>>53788860
>t-they're useless because I said so
The whole point of those exercises is to find holes in the defense and fix them you daft cunt

>>53788531
Active sonar doesn't really work against modern well-designed subs though.

>>53789017
>modern well-designed subs
So, not China

>>53789063
Yes, at least for now. Best corea is even worse off, and there are no other likely opponents in a war within the decade

>>53786772
underrated post

>>53788431
>exercises
Now try that again with modern maritime patrol aircraft, ASW helicopters and ASW destroyers/frigates on full alert. Carriers are faster than most subs too, so intercepting one in an actual battle (and not some laid out exercise) is much harder, and it needs to get really close since torpedos have a shit range. Also a sub would have fire a lot of fucking torpedos to actually sink a carrier, while the sub would sink in a heartbeat once it has been detected. Oh and torpedo countermeasures exist too, like acoustic decoys and also anti-torpedo torpedos

>>53784750
>The US even failed to support the brits last major war of foreign aggression
What was that? Suez?

>>53776326

>No homo/transexuals on baord
>No obese crew
>No bowling alley or burger king

Worst navy ever eh American?

File: 1361835094358.jpg (25KB, 409x235px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 409x235px

>>53776326
>a fucking ramp

>>53789823
>No bowling alley or burger king
That was fatal mistake, lack of freedom on board.

>>53776326
>It all seems suspicious to me.
Aren't this boats must have a lot of cover that consist from a little boats and AVACS with satellite link?

File: KEk1NF2.jpg (638KB, 1541x5406px) Image search: [Google]

638KB, 1541x5406px

>>53788495
there's the fact that someone cums in the brownie batter for /k/ meetups

File: 1423678339964.jpg (115KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1000x563px

>>53776326
>the year 2016
>nuclear reactors

it's all fun and games until chang or patel uses one of those drill torpedoes like in that bond film to put a big hole in the side of your reactor and you irradiate half of the pacific ocean and your crew all grow a third arm. meanwhile we will be fine in such a scenario.


>angled deck

why would we do that? then we have to secure everything so it doesn't roll into the sea, one day you're going to regret your silly designs

>catapults
>radar

catapults are medieval age tech lad, and radar was used to defeat the germans LMAO are you SERIOUSLY telling me you haven't advanced in the past 70 years?

>arresting gear
>not shooting gear

now you're just baiting, since when has an american peacekeeper ever bothered to arrest anyone or anything?

>>53790184
Yeah they will travel with lots of escort ships

>>53789794
In the Falklands War the first thing the Americans did was try and transfer sovereignty of the islands to Argentina. Like idiots the Argies refused the diplomatic route so the Americans got fed up and helped us instead

>>53776662
One can do ASW

File: latest[1].jpg (41KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 512x512px

>>53781416

Its the symbol of perfiddy and treachery

>>53783373
No.

>>53784389
>triggered

Britain is the most pathetic it has been in centuries.

A FUCKING RAMP

F
U
C
K
I
N
G

R
A
M
P

>>53797775
Not true, you're ignorant of British history. We're leaps and bounds better than we were in the 70s

A fucking ramp (times 2) is better than no fucking carrier at all, which is where we're at now family

>>53786139
Jesus fucking Christ this guy got triggered.

File: 14423997843990.jpg (177KB, 533x388px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 533x388px

>>53786772
savage

>>53786642
Don't meet people on 4chan.

Brits should know this.

>>53786772
Then how will the terrorists know which tower to crash into?

Checkmate Francois al-Muhammed

File: image.jpg (138KB, 1136x640px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1136x640px

>>53797994
Your share of World GDP has dropped harder than ours.

>>53798749
1) -0.02% is a smaller drop than -0.14%

2) That's a GDP (PPP) ranking, therefore not suited for international comparison of state economic power

File: 1870 gdp.png (12KB, 1020x72px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 1020x72px

>>53798749
Just to demonstrate how stupid you are, pic related is GDP (PPP) - as in your table - in 1870 which was the height of British power

As you can see, by this measure we were never the biggest economy due to our small population, the Chinese and Indian economies were both larger and Britain still defeated both of them in war despite this.

Oh yeah, thanks for reminding me, defeating India and China is something the USA hasn't accomplished and probably never will. Oh well at least you have your irrelevant tables of statistics you don't even understand.

File: damnson.jpg (76KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 500x500px

>>53799318

File: 1437107610135.jpg (740KB, 1900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 1900x1200px

India will have a better carrier than the brits within 15 years...

>>53800181
Because it has catapults instead of a ramp?

File: Shit Britain.jpg (92KB, 634x692px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 634x692px

>aircraft carriers with vulnerable decks
>aircraft with human pilots

Floating burger palaces are only good for oppressing pleb countries. In an actual war, against a competent foe, they will be crushed. And anything that gets off the deck will get out maneuvered by Drones pulling 20 G turns.

I can't believe we are wasting our money on this shit.

>>53776326
You know, I like UK and admire their naval power and all but that thing really does look ugly. Like a repurposed freighter or something. That rust-colored deck is not helping either.

>>53800181
are people really this retarded?

>>53781322
Israel has quite substantial percentage of Muslims and manages to keep order, excepting palestinian fanatic stabbers. How do they do it?

File: PALVdeMayoV-2[1].jpg (511KB, 1024x718px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1024x718px

>>53800181
>>53800588
I'm asking that question because the only full scale naval war between modern navies since WW2, the Falklands War, featured a navy with a flat carrier with catapults against one with a ramp carrier

I assume the ramp carrier guys lost, right? Catapults won the day for sure

>>53792013
I believed only US of A has normal escort for carriers even we don't have that much escort like US of A.

File: F-35B-on-Royal-Navy-carrier-HMS-Queen-Elizabeth-45157052.jpg (75KB, 1024x574px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1024x574px

>>53776326

What do you want nuclear reactors for?

>>53801064
Of course it looks ugly like that, judge it when it's finished

>>53776326
what exactly is an *Electronic Warfare aircraft*

>>53801002
What drones?

File: maritime task group.png (81KB, 1035x473px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1035x473px

>>53801258
No, the Royal Navy is being reformed to provide a Maritime Task Group at all times. The centrepiece of the Maritime Task Group is the aircraft carrier - one carrier will be always available.

The Maritime Task Group will be between 10 - 25 ships, depending on the intensity of the operation. Pic related. At the extreme minimum it will include frigates, a destroyer, submarine and supply ships.

Source of pic:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/492800/20150118-SDSR_Factsheets_1_to_17_ver_13.pdf

>>53801308
It's an aircraft that uses Electromagnetic interference to disrupt enemy units, for example, fucking up their radar so they can't see your fighters properly