quote:

Originally posted by AFRet91:
All those flying Reapers and such sure present a pretty picture for the concept, but, keeping them on an airfield inside the area they are going to help protect? Who will protect them? The Iraqis? I wonder if they could be launched from an converted aircraft carrier. Kind of like a Harpoon that can return home to fight again another day. Seems like a good idea.

quote:

Originally posted by 13243977:
Great work guys, love this type of story. I bet the pilots are wondering if their jobs are becoming obsolite?

quote:

Originally posted by bill_kananen:
Will the pilots in Nevada get combat ribbons???

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
The idea of a carrier, sounds good, but would be too expensive in reality. In 1972, the U.S.S. Forrestal, just tied to the pier, that's just the ship, not crew and aircraft, just the ship cost one million dollars a day to operate. In the thirty five years since then, I would imagine, that the cost has gone up quite a bit.
Those guys in Nevada and Arizona, are pilots, so don't sell 'em short. Anything that can remove personnel from harms way is a great idea. 'Nother thing, when you don't have to worry about your butt getting shot off in the cockpit, you will put that unmanned aircraft into places and do things, that you'd only rarely do in a manned aircraft...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
The idea of a carrier, sounds good, but would be too expensive in reality. In 1972, the U.S.S. Forrestal, just tied to the pier, that's just the ship, not crew and aircraft, just the ship cost one million dollars a day to operate. In the thirty five years since then, I would imagine, that the cost has gone up quite a bit.
Those guys in Nevada and Arizona, are pilots, so don't sell 'em short. Anything that can remove personnel from harms way is a great idea. 'Nother thing, when you don't have to worry about your butt getting shot off in the cockpit, you will put that unmanned aircraft into places and do things, that you'd only rarely do in a manned aircraft...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Actually, you don't need a carrier, per se. Rather, you could have a ship offshore that has vertical launch tubes to launch the drones. The wings could fold out after launch. To recover the drones, you can have them fly back into a net for recovery. It is similar to how the Battleships deployed and recovered their drones during the first Gulf War. Such a ship would not be as expensive to operate and would provide better security than having the drones on land.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
The idea of a carrier, sounds good, but would be too expensive in reality. In 1972, the U.S.S. Forrestal, just tied to the pier, that's just the ship, not crew and aircraft, just the ship cost one million dollars a day to operate. In the thirty five years since then, I would imagine, that the cost has gone up quite a bit.
Those guys in Nevada and Arizona, are pilots, so don't sell 'em short. Anything that can remove personnel from harms way is a great idea. 'Nother thing, when you don't have to worry about your butt getting shot off in the cockpit, you will put that unmanned aircraft into places and do things, that you'd only rarely do in a manned aircraft...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by AFRet91:
All those flying Reapers and such sure present a pretty picture for the concept, but, keeping them on an airfield inside the area they are going to help protect? Who will protect them? The Iraqis? I wonder if they could be launched from an converted aircraft carrier. Kind of like a Harpoon that can return home to fight again another day. Seems like a good idea.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
The idea of a carrier, sounds good, but would be too expensive in reality. In 1972, the U.S.S. Forrestal, just tied to the pier, that's just the ship, not crew and aircraft, just the ship cost one million dollars a day to operate. In the thirty five years since then, I would imagine, that the cost has gone up quite a bit.
Those guys in Nevada and Arizona, are pilots, so don't sell 'em short. Anything that can remove personnel from harms way is a great idea. 'Nother thing, when you don't have to worry about your butt getting shot off in the cockpit, you will put that unmanned aircraft into places and do things, that you'd only rarely do in a manned aircraft...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Actually, you don't need a carrier, per se. Rather, you could have a ship offshore that has vertical launch tubes to launch the drones. The wings could fold out after launch. To recover the drones, you can have them fly back into a net for recovery. It is similar to how the Battleships deployed and recovered their drones during the first Gulf War. Such a ship would not be as expensive to operate and would provide better security than having the drones on land.

Just remember, no ship is ever "cheap" to operate. They are a necessary expense, but expensive none the less.
You could destroy every drone in place and still not come up to the tens of millions to cover just the cost of building a ship, let alone the crew and then the daily upkeep, not to mention overhauls, ships are just expensive...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by AirForceAggie:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
The idea of a carrier, sounds good, but would be too expensive in reality. In 1972, the U.S.S. Forrestal, just tied to the pier, that's just the ship, not crew and aircraft, just the ship cost one million dollars a day to operate. In the thirty five years since then, I would imagine, that the cost has gone up quite a bit.
Those guys in Nevada and Arizona, are pilots, so don't sell 'em short. Anything that can remove personnel from harms way is a great idea. 'Nother thing, when you don't have to worry about your butt getting shot off in the cockpit, you will put that unmanned aircraft into places and do things, that you'd only rarely do in a manned aircraft...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Actually, you don't need a carrier, per se. Rather, you could have a ship offshore that has vertical launch tubes to launch the drones. The wings could fold out after launch. To recover the drones, you can have them fly back into a net for recovery. It is similar to how the Battleships deployed and recovered their drones during the first Gulf War. Such a ship would not be as expensive to operate and would provide better security than having the drones on land.

Just remember, no ship is ever "cheap" to operate. They are a necessary expense, but expensive none the less.
You could destroy every drone in place and still not come up to the tens of millions to cover just the cost of building a ship, let alone the crew and then the daily upkeep, not to mention overhauls, ships are just expensive...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

true, but some ships are less than others. I don't see the need for a full blown carrier, but you can have a ship similar to another design the navy has for a cruise missile ship. It doesn't have to be sophisticated, just have enough surface space for all of the vertical launch tubes. Since the ship can be modular in design and ammunition, you can also cut down in the manpower required to operate such a ship. Also, it doesn't have to be one configuration in ammo. You can have a mix of Tomahawks, drones, etc.