# Carriers to be electric powered (BBC News)



## SN NewsCaster (Mar 5, 2007)

The MoD announces the new Portsmouth based Royal Navy "Super Carriers" will be electrically powered, 

More from BBC News...


----------



## Keltic Star (Jan 21, 2006)

I just hope they are not relying on Joseph Lucas to provide the technology. LOL


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

*Heaven help us.....*

_*“The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says HMS Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales will be more fuel efficient compared to older ships”*_ .. Ummm, talk about stating the obvious…and at the same time getting it wrong. (EEK) 

Surely it would take the workings of a super-human brain in this modern age to make a new ship that was less efficient than the one that goes before it; as for explaining that the *Ministry of Defence *is also known by its three initial letters, well fair enough, but for goodness sake get it right and realise that the middle one is NOT lower case. Maybe the carrier will be called HmS PoW (Jester) .

Oh well, we paid for some clown to write that, I guess we should expect nothing less from the *BbC*


----------



## J Boyde (Apr 7, 2005)

Electrical eh, they will need a very long cable so it can be plugged into, or will they only be short trips. LOL
Jim B


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

*New carriers will be electric powered*

Will they have a key meter?!.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7654716.stm

David


----------



## Ron Stringer (Mar 15, 2005)

*New carriers will be electric powered*

New carriers will be electric powered. So now we will be dependent on EDF (French) for our defence as well as our electrical supplies.


----------



## Jeff Taylor (Oct 13, 2006)

Doesn't say, but I assume they will be shaft driven rather than the azipods virtually universal on the newer cruise ships.


----------



## Steve Woodward (Sep 4, 2006)

Although I suspect that as a tax payer this is going to cost me a couple of bob, but I for am keenly looking forward to what modern British yards can turn out.


----------



## Pat McCardle (Jun 12, 2005)

The tax payer again hey! I wonder if that is why the Inland Revenue are cutting back on the Seafarers Earnings Deduction? (Tongue firmly in cheek)


----------



## jimmys (Jan 5, 2007)

*Carriers*

Powered by gas turbine alternator sets 70 MW, diesel alternator sets 39 MW.
Electric motors thro' shafts to two props.
Steam turbines are great for ships. I do not like gas turbines, my experiences of them have not been good.
Feeding them rice to clean the blades was not the high point of my career. I think I will leave that to the Navy.

regards
jimmy


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

Ron Stringer said:


> New carriers will be electric powered. So now we will be dependent on EDF (French) for our defence as well as our electrical supplies.


We already are. The company designing them is French, and the company building them is partly French owned, so we may as well man them with Frenchmen as well. Then, as part of a PPF deal, we can charter them back.


----------



## Hadleigh Shrimper (May 3, 2008)

I suddenly have a vision of the new 'super-carriers' with a wind-farm bolted to the deck !! Renewable energy and all that....
Would make for interesting take-off and landings.(if we actually have any money left to supply them with flying machines)


----------



## Jas m (Jun 18, 2008)

These new carriers will be driven by dry batteries ....but they will be rechargable so the wind farm idea is sound


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

The state of the U.K. economy in future years may well be a decisive factor in the scrapping of these ships before they are built


----------



## BlythSpirit (Dec 17, 2006)

I think they will be equipped with the American Joint Defense planes if we can still afford to buy them.


----------



## wigger (Sep 25, 2005)

The Sunday Times back in September had an article claiming Britain was considering pulling out of the JSF project. It may be untrue but would it be really surprising if it wasn't?
1- The cost has allegedly gone up from £9 billion to around £15 billion.
2 - There have been problems with America sharing information regarding technology.
3 - The JSF may not have been the best option in the first place.


----------



## BlythSpirit (Dec 17, 2006)

Lord only knows what we would equip the carriers with in that case - we don't have any supersonic new planes on the drawing board!


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

Given the current financial climate we could use Sopwith Cuckoos, I suppose. Or go all technological and use Hawker Ospreys and Vickers Wildebeests, oh, sorry, given that they're really French carriers, we'll need to be using Latecoeres ......
Given the fiasco with the unflyable Chinooks, perhaps relying on US technology may not be a good idea. On the other hand, having no technology of our own, apparently, what options do we have?


----------



## wigger (Sep 25, 2005)

Chouan, you could be on the right track! The Dassault Rafale might be an option, its proven technology and seems more than adequate for the French Navy. Some sort of naval version of the Typhoon would be the better bet I suppose, but that would still involve huge cost as its not been designed for carriers ops. BAE were rumoured to have looked into what would be needed some time ago though so who knows?


----------



## BlythSpirit (Dec 17, 2006)

****** now you have me worried -wasn't it the french who designed an aircraft carrier that wasn't big enough to handle the Rafale (Jester)


----------



## Tony D (May 2, 2004)

Well the Admiralty is the organization that when finally forced to admit steam power was here to stay wanted steam powered tugs built that would tow sail powered battle waggons such as Victory to the scene of battle then cut em loose to do their thing.
(EEK)


----------



## wigger (Sep 25, 2005)

Yes BlythSpirit, that story sounds familiar - it doesn't look good does it?
I wonder how hard it would be to go back to steam catapults? Would we design our own (time consuming and expensive) or buy the US design the French/US Navy use?


----------

