Why do so many navies fall for the ski-jump meme?

Catapults are very hard to get right.

>>31599513
Too poor to operate a nuclear carrier.

>>31599513
CATOBAR is expensives, mang

They don't; after a while the sun causes the deck to warp

>>31599533
No, it's because CATOBAR is fucking expensive. especially when your government is as retarded as the UK government.

>>31599513
Phew.

Thank God the carrier I was deployed on didn't have a ramp like that. We had to PT enough up and down that fucking flight deck. Adding a hill would suck dick.

File: 35226.jpg (90KB, 404x419px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 404x419px

>Why do so many countries not fall for the $619 billion dollar military expenditure meme
Fuck off OP, you know for a fact it's all about money and for 90% of countries it's too expensive. Delete your thread.

File: 1414140724199.jpg (41KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x375px

>>31599513
Maybe the US fell for the catapult meme. Really makes you think...

>>31599513
>Why do so many navies fall for the ski-jump meme?

Probably for the same reason so many autistic fucktards start the same thread over and over again.

File: aircraft carrier.jpg (571KB, 2000x1247px) Image search: [Google]

571KB, 2000x1247px

>>31599695
It makes me think the US military falls for all the best memes.

>>31599625
kek

>>31599630
>Not having a ramp
Stay pleb

>>31599854
>we gunna power it with nukes, then fill it with nukes so we can nuke while we nuke
best memes

>>31599854
>having so many planes on the deck that you can't actually launch any

'merica stronk

>>31600396
There are catapults on the port side aswell.

althought I am not 100% sure they normally launch f/a-18's from there or if its even possible

>>31599879
>Having the most pleb launch method
>Calling anybody a pleb
top irony

>>31600352
The nuclear power plant sort of confuses me, because it still has to stop with the fleet while the other ships refuel.
Is it purely to reduce fuel costs, or are they retarded?

>>31600421
they do and it is

>>31600396
That's hanger cleaning day.

File: PaintHooks-BA.jpg (217KB, 3000x1800px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 3000x1800px

>>31600900
It's important to keep your hangers clean.

>>31600851
well no shit it still needs to restock the fucking aircraft and personnel aren't nuclear powered.

>>31600941
That's what i'm saying. Why give it an expensive, potentially dangerous reactor when it still needs to dock at the same rate as before? Are there cost benefits? More room for aircraft armaments?

>>31600851
my guess is that a convention power plant wouldn't be as space efficient as a nuclear power plant.

>>31600958
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/11/the-advantages-of-expanding-the-nuclear-navy

>>31600851
>>31600958
>fox and grapes

>>31599513
why do you fall for the no content faggot meme op post?

>>31599513
It's cheaper than catapults and it still works.
Meanwhile the bongs will just wait for the Americans to perfect the new catapult system then they can easily retrofit it to their carriers once the tech is reliable.

>>31599545
San Paulo is not nuclear carrier.

File: Chink Aircraft Carrier.jpg (788KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

788KB, 1000x662px

>Chinese navy

>>31600958

It doesn't roll alone. There's a variety of ships just to supply and service it.

It stays put on station, and they run the people and supplies to it.

>>31600994
It's also a peice of shit.

>>31601005
Why?

Because it's not American?

It can launch Rafales (if Brazil had Rafales in the firs place), also CdG there's no skijump...Well Charles de Gaulle is shit, but the point is taken.

>>31599513
it can launch harriers iirc

>>31600851
Fuel has weight you know

>>31601018
It's a late 1950's era carrier(1957) operating in 2016, that alone is a problem. It's had numerous major fires and explosions under Brazil's care and at this point with "modernization" it's equivalent to a 60 year old person going under the knife to try to be younger.

>>31600851
Nuclear vs. Conventional Marine Power Plants

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-019.htm

File: CiwfO-8W0AAKQEa.jpg (115KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1024x681px

>>31601018
>Well Charles de Gaulle is shit

Why ?

>>31600396
Not the brightest star in the sky, are you?

>>31604876
More accurate to say it was shit. They've fixed most of the problems with it. Though needing to get refueled every 7 years is a pain in the ass, especially when you've only got one carrier. And with the upcoming refit they won't have a carrier at all for almost 2 years.