Why is the Ford class so backwards?

Yes.

>>34083526

Yeah. In fact, they think it's a privilege to work on the carrier, even.

This is bait.

Though later builds of the Ford will be implementing a automated munitions handling system likely inspired from the QEC. Both the RN and USN do a significant level of technical and idea sharing.

Same with submarines.

>>34083526
First off, the Ford has a nuclear reactor.

>>34083526

A

>>34083591

FUCKING

>>34083526
>what is damage control
Many hands make light work.
Hope nothing bad ever happens to your oceangoing quarterpipe, lime

>>34083601

RAMP

>>34083526
ford has a reactor
also the united states has more money and people than england, so generally you should consider that before comparing the two

>>34083591
>>34083601
>>34083612

How will Britfags ever recover?

>>34083579
Does it have thousands of acolytes praying to it or something like it's Warhammer 40k? Subs have nuclear reactors and very small crews.

>>34083526

>Pretty good carrier thread having a decent chat elsewhere
>REEE WHY AREN'T THEY HATING THE BRITS
>I know, I'll go pretend to be one to try and bait!

You're too obvious these days.

>>34083629
The reactors used in subs are very different from those used on modern carriers.
just ask the french or any of the crewmen of the former USS enterprise

>>34083615
Does that mean you can afford to be backwards and build carriers which are just upgraded WWII vessels? I suppose so. They're only good for darkie-bombing wars anyway. Fighting anyone serious they will be kept well out of harm's way.

>>34083526

The QE has a ramp, therefore isn't even a real carrier.

prove me wrong

File: colonel_klink.jpg (12KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 320x240px

>building a 70,000 ton escort carrier

>>34083526

FUCKING BRITFAG

YOU AREN'T EVEN HUMAN

GO BACK TO YOUR ISLANDS OF INBREEDING

WE DON'T WANT YOU ON AN AMERICAN BOARD

ENJOY YOUR SHITTY BRITISH POUNDS

AND YOUR SHITTY QUEEN

AND YOUR SHITTY CARRIER

AND YOUR SHITTY TV LICENSE

AND ISIS

File: 1485397161500.png (200KB, 326x315px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 326x315px

>>34083526
>trying to suppress a fire, stop water ingress or just really any major damage control at all on the ship that large with only 800 hands
RIP

>>34083526

We should've nuked the British Islands in 1945.

Disgusting Europoors. They're wiener lovers, I can smell it on them.

File: Capture.png (290KB, 977x1001px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 977x1001px

its funny because the ford is about twice as big as the QE

>>34083716
Didn't the hues withdraw sao paulo recently?

>>34083661
>>nuclear powered carrier
>>backwards, upgraded WW2 ship

Do bonglanders actually think like this?

>20 replies
>10 IPs

Some hardcore samefagging going on

>>34083661
We had the Iowas active in Desert Storm so yeah.

File: 20161214020232_Grand Parking avant.jpg (178KB, 1300x731px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1300x731px

>>34083603
This.
There are only 1900 personels aboard the 42 thousands tons Charles de Gaulle, including 700 for the aircrafts, with 30 jets, 2 catapults, and 2 nuclear reactors to manage. Sometimes, despite a good automation level and integration, things get messy. The crew does its job whatsoever (in June 2016, the United States Navy awarded the crew of the Charles de Gaulle a Meritorious Unit Commendation) but the next french carrier will have much more room for the crew, an even higher level of automation, and yet probably more people onboard.
Also the ship is considered way to small by its commanding officers to the point it's a PITA to find room for more stuff onboard the ship.

With only 800 people aboard a QE I really hope nothing will require hand work if SHTF. On the other hand there's probably enough room to have some more crew onboard if needed, so it shouldn't be very hard to get 1000 sailors or so on these things.

>>34083748
Pretty sure these are all OP.
>>34083715
>>34083685
>>34083536
>>34083552
/k/ could genuinely benefit from both IDs and flags, I don't care how much the europoors piss and moan about it.

>>34083526
>no angled flight deck
>ramp

>>34083777

BITCH

File: 1493475304685.png (727KB, 1280x1419px) Image search: [Google]

727KB, 1280x1419px

>>34083788
drink some sugarelly and calm down, OP.

>>34083629
>Does it have thousands of acolytes praying to it or something like it's Warhammer 40k?
Yes.

The prayers of the average navy surface-ship sailor are of extremely low quality, so you need thousands of them to appease the machine spirit.

>>34083629
>making comparisons to 40K
>letting everyone know you're autistic
What are you doing?

>>34083767

That 800 number only includes the ship's company and not air elements (obviously dependent on air group size) which can rise to 1 600.

File: 1490105177188.png (341KB, 800x430px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 800x430px

>>34083777
Faggot IDs are for containment boards fuck you

File: la-0930-pin04.jpg (102KB, 970x615px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 970x615px

>>34083839
>an autist
>on 4chan
STOP THE GODDAMN PRESSES

>>34083871
I think there's a certain containment board you should go back to
>>>/int/
Shoo shoo, whiny europoor

>>34083913
Only faggots from containment boards or redditors like ids

>>34083863
...Which makes a lot more sense now, thanks.

File: 280804C1.jpg (220KB, 1375x1819px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1375x1819px

>>34083939
Keep whining, it'll make it all the sweeter when /k/ becomes an American board again.

>>34083716
Maybe 25% bigger, not twice though.

>>34083526

Because the whole point of an _aircraft_ carrier is _aircraft_ operations. For that you need an entire ground crew (towing, fuel, munitions, cargo), and ATC controllers who support the airplane, radio and weapon operators. Beneath that, there also needs to be people to operate all the onboard vehicle, fuel and cargo storage and maintence personnel (engine, vehicle and software) and their support staff (inventory room, server sysadmin).

Then there are the boat's operations themselves: each boat is powered by an A1B reactor which per law requires multiple operators, maintence and security personnel. The auxiliary power generator needs their own operators and maintence staff too along with a general maintence staff of plumbers and electricians. Then there's the kitchen and custodial staffs. Only now do we get to the actual command staff.

(also: add in any sort of extra people on board eg diplomats, special forces, technicians, submarine operators, PT boat operators, crane operators, scientists, firemen, pilots, astronauts, aquanuats etc that any individual mission might require)

>>34084034

Now, everything I've listed has to be multiplied by three to ensure an OSHA-compliant 8-hour average workshift. From the 4,500 number you listed the "base" crew is probably something more like 1,500.

Most of these jobs cannot be easily automated without creating a major job demand somewhere else. For example, if the entire kitchen staff is eliminated with a vending machine there needs to be mechanics on duty 24/7 to ensure that the vending machine is always operative. This is also resource intensive, especially if prepackaged MREs are used as opposed to bulk food stored in sealed barrels which translates into a higher garbage output (undesirable as it means more space is being devoted to it onboard) and a higher power output (which may be limited during combat). Aircraft ops in particular cannot be easily thrown out, as aircraft are stored on a bottom deck where they cannot move on their own power.

>>34083976
>again
when has it ever not been?

>>34083526
It's American doctrine to stuff their carriers with as many people as possible.
They have the money for it
They have the man power for it
The have the ships for it.

More bodies means more hands to put out fires, more replacements for dead crew, and potentially longer time at sea due to a higher workload capacity.

RN's decision to automate this much is entirely due to the current climate of the Royal Navy, the restrictions of economy and available manpower dictate concern. As does elements like the Ramp and lack of Reactor.

UK doesn't have the infrastructure to support nuclear powered warships of this scale like the US. To do so would be a horrendous investment for an already over budget carrier program.

This is a bait thread, you made me reply, good job. UK aint an empire no more, it doesn't need the shit the US has, likewise the US doesn't need the kind of ships the UK has.

The QE is a good, solid bote. She will serve us well, I'm sure the Ford class will serve the Americans well too. [kwillneverhavespoilers]can't wait for bote smut too.[/kwillneverhavespoilers]

>>34083767

>With only 800 people aboard a QE

There are 1,600 aboard in a deployment with the standard airwing.

With the full airwing it'd easily be higher.

Whats the standard airwing on deployment going to be for these boats? As far as i'm aware there rarely operate at full capacity

>people actually responded to this

You guys realize this is just another episode of British inferiority complex shitting up /k/ again, right? I'm not even American (leaf) but i've argued with these insecure bongfucks enough to be able to recognize them by their writing.

>>34084565

Peacetime Movement/Training/Home Waters - 12 F-35B plus whatever helos aren't busy and need the training

Standard Deployment - 24 F-35B plus 14 helos

Specific Conflict Combat Deployment - 36 F-35B plus 4-14 helos depending on task force composition to carry the ASW

SHTF Surge Deployment - 48 F-35B plus 20+ helos.

Any of these bar the last one will likely see presence by the USMC too. Lot of cross training going on to let the USMC operate off them, which is pretty smart.

>>34084601

Except, y'know, it's just the same thread by the same guy again who pretends to be an overly nationalistic Bong to try and rile people up against them. It's been the latest shitposting meme over the past few months.

>>34084041
>OSHA compliance
>On an aircraft carrier
You're retarded. Only idiots talk about OSHA like it has any real power let alone that it regulates the working conditions of the military.

File: USA.jpg (17KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 250x250px

>>34084601
it's fun to argue with dad when he's drunk you know that.
Now get your cute butt over here and give your big brother some sugar, Canada

File: royalcaliphatenavy.png (3MB, 1772x997px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1772x997px

>>34083526
>a-automated munitions!

>>34084671
Nope. Any fucking time someone talks about the USN, Russian Navy or PLAN, there are always these few attention thirsty britfucks ready to swoop in and start up an uninvited discussion about the RN just to try and feel as if their part of the big navy club, not to mention those few threads every day that some English fuck makes claiming superiority to both Russians and Americans.

That whole cringetastic routine has become suffocatingly boring by now, leading me to wonder why they can just accept that they are no longer in league with other big armies anymore. We Canadians shitpost a lot but FFS we do not have a chip on our shoulders towards Americans on /k/, unlike the English.

>>34084744
*cannot just accept

>>34083526
>Is this some kind of workfare program to keep them off the streets?
Yes, the entirety of the US military program is actually glorified gibs for welfare queens and basketball americans..

>>34084660
With how few f-35s they are buying and with them being RAF owned how likely is 24 per standard deployment going to be? Would you be surprised if it was more like 12 per standard deployment?

>>34084744
>here are always these few attention thirsty britfucks ready to swoop in and start up an uninvited discussion about the RN

Point to one, ONE thread where this happened and fuck, what an asinine complaint.

>>34084694
lel. confirmed for never having been in the military

>>34083661
>Fighting anyone serious they will be kept well out of harm's way.

There are maybe two other countries in the world that could pose a serious threat and they both have nukes so there would be no conventional war anyways. Against the other 99% of countries in the world the carriers work just fine.

>>34083661
>Fighting anyone serious they will be kept well out of harm's way.
found the Russian
how's that "Heavy Aviation Cruiser" treating you?

>>34084817
lel. Confirmed for never having a job.

>>34083692
Most English sailors have two hands so 1,600 total.

Check mate.

File: guty.jpg (5KB, 260x341px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 260x341px

>>34084787
I could talk for hours about all the Navy threads in which i've had to suffer through the shitposts of some extremely pathetic and validation needy Britshits who for whatver fucking reason cannot live without having to tell and reassure everyone that they are in league with Americans and Russians on all matters military.

Just a few days ago, that thread comparing the recruitment and training methods of various special forces across the world fell victim to this same fucking headache of British insecurity; You fucks couldn't do more than a few posts before tearing into yet another S-S-STOP TALKING ABOUT T-THOSE Y-YANKS AND PAY ATTENTION T-TO US begging session.

Again, we live right fucking next to Americans, are often bashed and mocked by them on nearly everything, and even then no one in this country has developed any resentment to Americans yet you rotmouths live almost 3000 miles away and have this everlasting need to prove something to them, I will never understand what it is about you people that has left you all nursing such a heavy inferiority complex, but please stop spewing it onto /k/.

>>34083863
So OP is just a stupid fag

>>34084878

I've asked one thing of you and one thing only and that was for you to post a single thread where what you've claimed has happened. You've been unable to do so, instead you proved a paragraph of your rambling. Good job.

You also don't know who makes what posts since /k/ does not have flags, so stop assuming you know who exactly is posting what.

File: 1470779149585.jpg (185KB, 850x1259px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 850x1259px

>>34084893
Was there ever any doubt?

>>34084694

Government jobs operate at the speed of government for a reason: OSHA compliance.

>>34084846

Government jobs are anal retentive about safety as is anything Union (eg, all the civilian support staffs that occasionally have to come onto boats to repair manufacturer defects caused by other Union members during assembly). This is especially true for everything that involves the vehicle's power system (it's nuclear reactor) which is literally a mobile power plant.

File: 1467221521692.gif (2MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x250px

>>34084915
>Just a few days ago, that thread comparing the recruitment and training methods of various special forces across the world fell victim to this same fucking headache of British insecurity; You fucks couldn't do more than a few posts before tearing into yet another S-S-STOP TALKING ABOUT T-THOSE Y-YANKS AND PAY ATTENTION T-TO US begging session

Are all you Arabs illiterate or what? Do you also want me to go fish through the archive for this lone thread you retarded inbred concert-bombing survivor or what?

>>34084915
>You also don't know who makes what posts since /k/ does not have flags, so stop assuming you know who exactly is posting what.
These posters EXPLICITLY identified themselves as English, and they weren't trolling. Fuck, you're hopelessly dense.

I'm not even sure why im getting heated, this is a matter between Bongs and Amerifats, and im just a spectator.

File: wssx3dx.png (130KB, 249x260px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 249x260px

>>34084915
>You also don't know who makes what posts since /k/ does not have flags, so stop assuming you know who exactly is posting what.
You make an excellent point, flags for /k/ 2016

File: tears of laughter.jpg (12KB, 204x247px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 204x247px

>>34084948
>Are all you Arabs illiterate or what? Do you also want me to go fish through the archive for this lone thread you retarded inbred concert-bombing survivor or what?
gotta love leafs when they get angry

>>34084948

Again my friend, I've asked one thing of you and that was to substantiate your claim. This is not a difficult or unreasonable thing.

So provide your goddamn verifiable proofs.

>>34083526
Hey guys lets double up on islands to reduce deck space for no fucking reason.

File: 1487337597925.png (159KB, 562x490px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 562x490px

>>34083685
The UK's internet generation is just really annoying and cancerous online.

I don't think they're really that bad irl.

>>34084771

By 2020 for the first deployment, it'll almost certainly be below 24, but thats just a first shakedown deployment outside of home waters.

From 2023, they'll have 24 available for the carriers at any given point. So From 2023, yes they will have them. Prior to that it's less likely, but they'll either be working on integrating USMC or just on tour deployments so it's not such an issue for those few years.

File: 1480456555182.gif (2MB, 695x392px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 695x392px

>>34083526
I wonder what brand of CNC machines they have onboard, and what brands of manual machines they keep around for making spare parts.

HAAS? Taiwanese made manuals?

>>34084922
The military isn't regulated by OSHA. You're retarded. It only covers the private sector and Federal agencies.

Further, OSHA fines are practically nothing and enforcement of regulations typically only comes after the fact.

Finally, you have proven you know nothing about any work with your union worker hyperbole. Just admit you're wrong and shut up.

>>34084979

>>34082413
>>34082413
U N I R O N I C A L L Y begging for validation right from the fucking start, and that's just today.

You still need more you dense fuck?

>>34084968

Not even fully mad, its just impressive and spectacular how delusional these Brits tend to be. It's just as bad on other boards.

File: Trieste LHD.jpg (80KB, 1440x620px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1440x620px

>>34084984

Except there is a big reason. Conventional carriers that don't want to have a fuckhuge point of weakness in their drive systems split into two outgoing exhausts. This normally substantiates a long "building" on the deck using up a fuckton of space and a deck penetrating elevator. See the Invincibles, Kuznetsov, Cavour and all the helicopter carriers for example.

Splitting the islands in two from that giant building increased deck space and most importantly removed the need for a deck penetrating elevator on conventional carriers of this type.

Note that both Italy and Russia are also moving to using duel islands. Pic related. It has objective benefits for conventional carrier layouts from deck allowance, elevator space and drive system splitting to increase survivability. Three separate countries wouldn't be doing it otherwise.

File: 1481393964772.jpg (48KB, 600x587px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x587px

>two islands
And theyre here making fun of the CdG

>>34085044

>he thinks bongs actually post QE bait threads

>>34083839
Oi! Nothing wrong with liking 40k.

>>34085054
It must suck having a non nuclear navy.

>>34085015
>>34085044

That's hardly asking for validation given that's an open invitation for criticism. You cannot pretend innocence of how much criticism they get. Especially the QE class.

Secondly, that's not an example for what you've claimed. You've claimed that threads have been derailed by British posters. You're still yet to substantiate this claim.

Finally, you don't know if those posters are actually British or not. The same way I don't actually know if your Canadian.

>>34084034
> For that you need an entire ground crew (towing, fuel, munitions, cargo), and ATC controllers who support the airplane, radio and weapon operators.

Literally all of this could be easily automated

>Then there's the kitchen and custodial staffs.
Should be automated

Manual labor should not be happening on a ship, these people cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep there

>>34085030

>The military isn't regulated by OSHA.

Yes but they make an attempt to adhere to their standards. This is especially true for the US Navy, as the majority of their operations (maritime transport) can easily accept OSHA standards without much if any impact.

>Further, OSHA fines are practically nothing

yeah but legal fees from wrongful injury/death suits add up especially if it's not a servicemember that is injured.

>Finally, you have proven you know nothing about any work with your union worker hyperbole.

There's a world of difference between installing cable inside a residential property and doing a power plant. The procedures (especially ones governing walking speed) are completely different. As it pertains here, boats are effectively mobile power plants.

>>34085114

>Literally all of this could be easily automated

OK, how? Fuel lines and bombs don't just attach themselves.

>Manual labor should not be happening on a ship,

then how does the 3,600 hot sauce packets cpl. mcdickface ordered get onto the helicopter that will take it to him?

File: quadcopters-info-inspire1.jpg (32KB, 506x284px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 506x284px

>>34085267
Drones

>>34085241
Again, you talk about OSHA like it matters. It doesn't. Further, OSHA doesn't regulate Department of Energy covered industries, so again, your point is invalid. This all goes back to my first point which is that only idiots talk about OSHA.

File: america shut the fuck up fucking cock-gobbling cunts.png (978KB, 1822x846px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 1822x846px

>>34083629

Based on the how sensitive /k/ is about their carriers, maybe.

And if it doesn't, it totally could.

>>34085388
>lime eternally buttflustered he's no longer the master of the sea
Please, keep posting.
I feed on the anguish of foreigners

File: tumblr_m4jmmsBc7W1qz9xx1o3_500.gif (959KB, 500x278px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 500x278px

can anyone tell me why it is that our carries have such a large airwing. I undertand that part of it is due to needing to maintain aircraft after flight time. But can't you only have a certain amount of your airwing in the air at one giving time due to how long it takes to launch each plane and recover them? Also what is the theoretical max that an aircraft carrier can put out. People like to act that all 60 or so fighters will be participating in some sort of conflict if against a neer peer adversary. If we were fighting like China what would we send out? I can see this as a good reason to have more smaller carriers as well if this is the case. I'd rather have two smaller carriers putting out 12 fighters at once than one big one doing so with the other 60 sitting below deck.

>>34085570
The wing doesn't just work on planes after flight hours. They have to constantly service complex equipment like radars, cryogenic fluids, and computers. Warplanes aren't like cars where you can leave them somewhere and start them up whenever you need them. They have to be constantly serviced on the ground even when not in use.

Then there's the operations staff that guides the planes on the deck, fuels them, and arms them. As mentioned, the more people you have available to do this the better, as it's incredibly demanding work physically.

Economy of scale makes a carrier with more planes to look after than it can put in the air at one time more feasible than smaller ships that would have to launch their entire wing at once to match in numbers.

>>34085570
>>34085773
You also have to account for the fact that for every ship you have, there's the requisite staff to operate the engines, reactor, systems, and personnel needs. If a supercarrier requires manpower and material cost X, and a smaller carrier requires manpower and material cost Y, it's always almost going to be a case where X<2Y

>>34085815
(for a given level of readiness, technology, and capability, that is)

File: 1402352274727.jpg (985KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

985KB, 1920x1200px

>>34085815
do you happen to also know how large of sorties we can send out. This is weirdly never discussed and seems more important than stupid shit like tonnage and all the other crap discussed here. Also what about USMC wasps and shit. How big of sorties can they send out.

If we were to attack an adversary like Russia or China. They are working with large airfields. So they theoretically can send out large sorties compared to a carrier i'm thinking.

Especially since we have to send out our AWACS and support aircraft too all from the same platform.

>>34085570
Keep in mind that while a Nimitz or Ford can hold 60 aircraft (not including helicopters), only 40-48 of those are dedicated fighters. And with 4 catapults you can get them off the deck in a hurry, usually within 15 minutes.

>>34085920

What the actual fuck is your image depicting?

>>34085995
I thought it was 3? 2 Main and 1 on the thats shorter and used for QRF or w/e the NAVY calls it.

So no one knows the sortie rates or how large. My boss need to know guys.

File: is that a steel frame from 1988.jpg (193KB, 950x950px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 950x950px

>>34086036
>he doesn't "get" art

File: 1401824289039.jpg (3MB, 1882x1440px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1882x1440px

>>34086036
A blimp with an artistic lens on it. I like it.

File: cvn-68-flight-deck-m.jpg (52KB, 1075x270px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1075x270px

>>34086053
Two cats on the bow, two cats on the port side. Quoted rate for a Nimitz is one plane every 20 seconds, and they can probably do better than that.

>>34086068

Is that really how a blimp works?

File: 1402352702299.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

another question about aircraft carriers. How does the cold weather affect the catapult system and missions. Due to the lower pressures can aircraft carriers operate around Alaska or the northern part of Russia. Have aircraft carriers ever done training mission near Norway or other cold places? I can imagine our AWACS having trouble getting airborne in extreme conditions. Are the catapults adjustable so that they can adapt to this shit. Our aircraft frames strong enough to deal with the extreme forces in these conditions. Do they need to be then stored under the deck rather than above deck as preferred for quick operations due to this?

imagine the duty sections
The new LCS class we have is just constantly under maintenance and there's just not enough people because le small crew meme and there's just too much to do
granted the LCS are lemons but I'd rather have more people to carry more of the weight than be running a barebones crew

>>34086148
Cold air at sea level is about as dense as you can get, and therefore the best for taking off and landing.

File: 1401769459396.jpg (1MB, 2560x1719px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1719px

>>34086117
its sci fi art. No thats not how a normal blimp works. They do have engines on the side to help it change direction and shit though.

>>34086181

I don't like this art.

>>34084041
8 hour average shift? You've never been in the Fleet, obviously.
And OSHA? Really?

>>34085920
>>34086068
>>34086148
>>34086181
That's some fantastic shit, anon. fuckin saved.
Who's the source?

File: try this.png (8KB, 608x130px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 608x130px

>>34086335
>spoonfeed me plz

>>34085114
Automated deck swabbing?

>>34085570
Alpha strike.

>>34086401
automated movement of aircraft around the carrier
automated cleaning all around the ship
automated loading of munitions/fueling/running diagnostics/etc

No unions in the military, no reason why people are doing manual labor

File: 1401732367993.png (192KB, 320x309px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 320x309px

>>34087784
>he waited until nearly everyone of value was asleep to reply to this thread so he'd win the argument by default
>he probably had a tab of this thread open all day
Pathetic, but hardly atypical

>>34085044
lel what an assblasted leaf

if you genuinely think it's bongs posting QE threads you're delusional.

>>34087818
this is some next level projection

>>34083526

Maybe because work shifts actually exist in the U.S. I mean it is so UK to understaff and overwork.

>>34083629
The machine spirit is sometimes a finicky thing.

>>34083526

800 crew is without the QE class's air wing.

So you are comparing a Ford class fleet carrier with it's full complement with a QE that can't launch or recover any aircraft.

At that point, why don't you cut it all the way down? The QE has a crew of 70 when at anchor watch.

>>34084034
>diplomats, special forces, technicians, scientists, pilots, astronauts, aquanuats etc that any individual mission might require

Nigga, what the fuck are they going to fight, the klingons?

>>34083526
>what happened in LCS
>implying that being heavily dependent on muh automation system is good thing

maybe, poor Brits can't afford personnel expenses,
so they bring "auto magic" at the expense of damage control, combat readiness and etc.

>>34083685

FUCKING SHARTNIK

YOU ARENT EVEN HUMAN

GO BACK TO YOUR BACKWATER OF INCEST

WE DONT WANT YOU NEAR COMPUTERS

ENJOY YOUR SHITTY AMERICAN DOLLARS

AND YOUR SHITTY PRESIDENT

AND YOUR SHITTY CARRIER

AND YOUR SHITTY HEALTHCARE

AND BLM

File: efd1c-donaldbandconcert.jpg (42KB, 320x233px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 320x233px

>>34088895
Why are you responding to yourself?

File: 1472099336233s.jpg (9KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 250x250px

>>34088915

>Being from Yankistan

File: 1451440391476.gif (4MB, 293x164px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 293x164px

>>34088927
Congrats you can own kinder eggs but we can own guns without rigorous homosexuality.

>>34088927
I'm not the one arguing with himself on a Manchurian flatland skateboarding forum here

>>34088940
But we can own kinder eggs in the US. They're just uncommon because a lot of stores bought the meme. We've been able to own them for years. i bought them from a little corner shop as a kid.
Honestly, I don't get the hype.
Why cover a toy in chocolate?

File: kinderproofs.jpg (309KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1280x960px

>>34088955
Here's some proofs for the doubtful.
Not my eggs and not my pa-63

File: Americans.jpg (40KB, 640x479px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x479px

>>34088940

There seems to be a lot of rigorous homosexuality involved with the ATF and state governments.
In fact the alphabet agencies really like fucking you about in general, cant use your gun much then can you? or you get even more charges to make an example of you

http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-you-commit-three-felonies-a-day-2009-9?IR=T


>>34088941
would never roleplay as a shartnik

>>34088276
Romulans

File: 1495698393015.jpg (24KB, 500x315px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x315px

>>34084878
This Canadian literally cannot empathise with people who aren't willing to be cucked and dismissed out of hand.
He cannot understand a non-submissive mentality.
"I hate these bongs who stand up for themselves in threads, we get shit on all the time but WE just sit in silence! Y dusnt evryone else roll over too?"

>>34088965
the local indoor gun range uses that exact receipt format. cool story i know.

>>34089403
There's a marked difference between easily dismissing people's criticism and being so emotionally invested in everything they have to say about to the point of spending all day begging for their attention to validate you.

>>34089708

If anyone is emotionally invested, it is you. Given you're carrying on an argument for a unverifiable claim.

>>34089815
>and yet he responded

The english are a truly pathetic bunch