Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Interesting
1 posted on 03/09/2006 7:26:31 PM PST by strategofr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: strategofr; neverdem; Army Air Corps
Interesting

indeed

2 posted on 03/09/2006 7:28:19 PM PST by King Prout (many accuse me of being overly literal... this would not be a problem if many were not under-precise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

Believe it when I see it.


3 posted on 03/09/2006 7:28:23 PM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr
". An aircraft carrier must fight, and find the enemy, and do a lot of other stuff...."

Automation will be fine until something goes really wrong, like a big fire or bomb or missle hit.

4 posted on 03/09/2006 7:31:31 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr
All three carriers are expected to be in service by the middle of the next decade.

Interesting article.
5 posted on 03/09/2006 7:32:26 PM PST by andyk (Go Matt Kenseth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

The thing about war is that you never can plan for all the contingencies. You need people who have the training and intelligence to respond to whatever happens, often something unexpected.

I'd be a bit worried about a carrier where the nearest person might be a couple of decks and a couple of hundred yards away from a sudden emergency. Maybe it could still be handled, but it's a concern.

Also, a certain amount of redundancy is important. What happens if all your key personnel in some area of expertise get killed? Fewer personnel, less redundancy, fewer backups to take the place of the killed and wounded.


8 posted on 03/09/2006 7:34:46 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevie_d_64

ping


13 posted on 03/09/2006 7:42:06 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

Sounds like an excellent idea in peace time, (and we all know the French boat will never see action) but the Brits should know that you can't fight a damaged ship and save it at the same time. You can maybe do one or the other with a crew that small, but not both.


17 posted on 03/09/2006 7:54:00 PM PST by adamsjas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

It's taking us years and hundreds of millions just to get robot pickers installed in our grocery warehouse. Good luck with the carriers...


19 posted on 03/09/2006 7:54:08 PM PST by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

I thought a good part of the crew requirement was determined by damage control teams. A crew of 40 for a supertanker sized vessel (even armed, fully automate the weapons mounts and round handling) may be ok if it does not expect to see any ordnance heading its way - eventually something's gonna hit!


24 posted on 03/09/2006 8:14:21 PM PST by Fred Hayek (Liberalism is a mental disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: xp38
Hey xp... I'll believe it when the Brits... And the Frenchies (Gad! Am I reallly thinking this?) built these suckers, man them and make it through a few hundred or so combat sorties and then solve some combat damamge while surviving to fly more sorties!

And I'll believe it when Canada buys one and does the same...

25 posted on 03/09/2006 8:34:13 PM PST by Bender2 (Redid my FR Homepage just for ya'll... Now, Vote Republican and vote often)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr
> aggressive plans for automation

Boy, those French will do anything to get out of an honest day's work.

27 posted on 03/09/2006 8:57:59 PM PST by NewJerseyJoe (Rat mantra: "Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

I wonder how well the robotic carrier will work after the first missile hits it.

Will there be robo-repairmen, too? Heaven forbid the power goes out...


29 posted on 03/09/2006 9:29:20 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Raaargh! Raaargh! Crush, Stomp!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Jeff Head

CV ping.


30 posted on 03/09/2006 9:37:12 PM PST by fallujah-nuker (America needs more SAC and less empty sacs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr; fallujah-nuker
Latest artist conception:


32 posted on 03/09/2006 10:00:50 PM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr

Kind of reminds me of a line from Star Trek II, when Scotty remarks after his automated piloting system breaks down, "But Captain, it was never designed to go into combat."


34 posted on 03/09/2006 11:07:43 PM PST by KellyAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: strategofr
[ Britain and France Build Robocarrier ]

Hmmm a Frogohauler.. sounds like a Rube Goldberg Surrender device to me..

42 posted on 03/10/2006 11:31:52 AM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson