The Aircraft Carrier That Is Almost Impossible to Sink

HMS Queen Elizabeth can carry up to 60 aircraft, including fixed-wing jets like the F-35 Lightning II, rotary-wing aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles. The flight deck is roughly the size of three football pitches, facilitating extensive air operations.

[doogleticker]

Without a sufficient number of state of the art escort ships for AAW and ASW, it becomes immensely more sinkable.

[rodyep]

It's not that this aircraft carrier is Unsinkable, but whatever country does sink it. You draw the entire Wrath of the UK and the United States, your country ceases to exist.

[Andrew-isrs]

Former cpt Jerry Kyd stated QE can carry 50+ F35B in 'surge conditions'

[Mnerd]

Do the USS John F. Kennedy supercarrier "USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79)" (the new super carrier that was "Scheduled to be delivered in 2025") and the old "USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) supercarrier" that was "Decommissioned in 2007" after serving for "Commissioned in 1968 and served for over 50 years". Start comparing the differences of it's technological prowess of these two John F. Kennedy supercarriers.

[sedi]

Well Orshinik makes them sitting ducks 😂

[aacvieira]

As about dreadnots, with obsolescence bring by the sea air carriers, the same apply to the sea air carriers, with obsolescence bring by hypersonics.

[ABSTRACT]

There goes a trillion dollars/pounds in tax $ when there’s nothing wrong with the previous carriers

[mitaanshshah]

It is not impossible to sink at all, the Charles De-Gaulle is stronger, the ship has no missiles for defence, only CIWS, and a few hypersonic, even supersonic missiles will take it out better ship for this title would be the Ford or Nimitz, certainly not the Elizabeth Class, and btw, the HMS Queen Elizabeth has spent most of its time in the dry dock with a host of issues, only the HMS Prince of Wales is somewhat deployable, not even mentioning the crew shortages

[gregorycannon]

I'm sorry...but the Ford class will set the benchmark by which all other carriers will be compared to

[robertgarcia]

Damn. The Ford class displaces 120k tons... 😂

[laygupta]

Only if this is able to come out of continuous repairs and maintenence... Pretty plagued with issues

[jasonlee]

Hype much?! Generally because of compartment arrangements and watertight divisions it is difficult to sink a large military asset because it's built into the design. That headline is click bait!

[RaushanKumar-tljq]

hyper sonic missile is launching in the corner 😂

[craigclaassen]

But why is it near impossible to sink?

[SaranSeanAnning]

How much do you wanna bet that a drone swarm to saturate the air defense capabilities coupled with some hypersonics would do it.

[joe_tipakuah]

Still in can sail to the seven seas although it's not nuclear powered

[xrenaudon]

Who do want to sink a carrier with no jets on 😗

[alexeimedvedev]

Возможно этот корабль и сложно потопить, но его возможности никакие, потому что при постройке решили сэкономить на одном из важнейших элементов полноценного авианосца, а именно на катапульте! Как результат - нормальных истребителей он нести не может, остаётся только унылое говно F-35B, с малым радиусом действия и низкой грузоподъёмностью; нормального самолёта ДРЛОиУ (типа "Hawkeye" какой-нибудь) он тоже нести не может, а вертолёт ДРЛОиУ значительно уступает "Хокаю" и по максимальной высоте и по радиусу действия и по времени патрулирования. Короче это не полноценный авианосец, а скорее аналог какого-нибудь вертолётоносца у которого убрали десантный возможности в угоду увеличения авиакрыла...

[rubeng]

They are unsinkable because they never leave port

[Barsamian]

Cannot afford to fit them both. They have 35 should a relying on the US Marine Corps.