Omakase

Amazon Search
«  
  »

No Clearing Turns

By lex, on May 31st, 2011

A BBC correspondent aboard FN Charles de Gaulle displays something rare in British history: Envy of French seapower.

“It’ll be a decade before British pilots can land their jets like this.”

Ay, and more’s the pity.

Share
May 31st, 2011 | Tags: , | Category: Flying, Navy

20 comments to No Clearing Turns

  • RonF
    May 31, 2011 at 12:16 pm

    How many American carriers are afloat and operational at any one time?

    • Sh1fty
      May 31, 2011 at 5:41 pm

      We’ve got 11 active, two building, and at least one more planned. (also, we just named the second Ford-class the USS John F Kennedy? Really?)

      Four to five are available for duty at one time, one or two are in deep maintenance and totally unavailable (say, reactor refueling), and the rest in less complex maintenance but unavailable for immediate duty.
      http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/where.htm

      • Mike Kozlowski
        June 1, 2011 at 5:18 am

        …A friend of mine who works as a strategic analyst thinks we’re gonna lose Enterprise and Nimitz in the next budget – as in turn ‘em around from wherever they’re at, tie ‘em up, and walk away (insofar as one can do that with a nuclear powered beast). And they won’t be replaced. Kennedy will take over for Ike, and it’ll be a one-for-one after that.

        While I’m at it, don’t get me started on carrier names these days.

        Mike

        • Sh1fty
          June 1, 2011 at 3:39 pm

          What a dumb thing to do. Once we decide to cut down a carrier we’ll never get it back – and don’t expect to see a carrier or two going away relieving pressure on the air wings, I’m sure we’ll cut the planes that went with those ships as well.

  • flatlander
    May 31, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    Something does seem out of place watching the cockpit video without the clearing turn, but I guess they just have one catapult.

  • Mags
    May 31, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    Maybe I missed something in the ‘translation’ from Brit to, um, American… when he said that there were no other ships in Nato that could do ‘that’, the ‘that’ meaning monitoring and controlling the airspace around the fleet (I think that’s what he said anyway)… what about good old Davy Jones and the USA? Hmmm. Also, not sure I agree with the closing comment that “It’ll be a decade before British pilots can land their jets like this,” unless of course he was referring to the Brits having a fixed wing carrier again. Certainly it will not take a ‘decade’ to train pilots to land and takeoff with a tailhook – or we would be in deep trouble, since we seemingly can do that in a matter of a few months once carqual training is begun following primary and advanced.

    • BeachBum
      May 31, 2011 at 3:33 pm

      I think when he said there were no other ships that could do that, he was referring to EU.

      Italy and Spain each have a pair of ships I’d guess you’d call LHD/LHA-equivalents, although our ships outgross the EU ships by at least 10,000 tons. The 2 Italian ships, Cavour and Garibaldi can only handle AV-8 and helos, same as the Spanish Principe de Asturias. Spain’s new ship the Juan Carlos I can take AV-8s, but can also fly Ospreys and is designed for F-35Bs (if Spain ever gets any).

      ..and I predict it WILL take the Brits 10 years from today until they have a squadron qualified for deck ops on their own carrier. They haven’t done any tailhook flying since they had Phantoms on the old Ark Royal– how many years ago was that? They have to rebuild their capabilities from scratch. The USN have been doing tailhook ops since the 1920s.

      • Quartermaster
        May 31, 2011 at 4:30 pm

        The Ark Royal made a port call in Norfolk in ’75 and was, IIRC, headed to the breakers yard after that deployment was over. So, it would seem, if memory serves, it’s been over 30 years since the flying Jack Tars have dropped a hook on an arresting cable.

    • yaJames
      May 31, 2011 at 4:39 pm

      At about 1:30 – “Here in the ship’s control room, the ship’s company can monitor land, sea and air. ‘Fraunce’ is the only NATO nation to have this capability.”

      Huh?

      In America, only reporters who are veterans write about military matters, so we’re not used to seeing mistakes. Right?

  • Mongo
    May 31, 2011 at 3:22 pm

    No clearing turn, and I’m waiting for the grade on that recovery. ;)
    Sad that between France and the UK there’s only one Carrier to work with. Something very, very wrong with that.
    Where are everybody’s friends, the Russians? Haven’t they a stake in all this?

  • Justthisguy
    May 31, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    The people who invented the aircraft carrier, with a Sopwith Pup with handles on it, no longer have any carriers?

    I reckon we own The Trident, by default of evverbody else. Let us use it rationally, in our own national interest, ignoring the septuply-damned neocons.

  • raz
    May 31, 2011 at 6:46 pm

    BTW, the frogs do it all with U.S. equipment/technology, compatable with U.S.N. aircraft. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F18_on_CdG.jpg.

  • Hogday
    June 1, 2011 at 4:09 am

    Aircraft carriers? British ones?? Don’t get me started…..;) BTW George HW Bush was here the other day. Big isn’t it!

    Lex your chums, I’ve posted up a few old bits of scrap metal from a visit to an air museum yesterday. Hope you enjoy.

    http://hogday-afternoon.blogspot.com/2011/06/empire-of-clouds-aka-those-were-days.html

  • Steeljaw Scribe
    June 1, 2011 at 6:43 am

    I think the reporter was referencing the Unified Protector forces drawn from NATO off Libya, in which case he is technically correct.

  • Nose
    June 2, 2011 at 8:28 pm

    With one cat, you only need a clearing turn if you are steaming alongside another boat…
eXTReMe Tracker

View My Stats