Modern Aircraft Carrier

[Dook]

I do enjoy it. More than you can imagine.

[safewalrus]

As I said enjoy while you can, easy come easy go! unless you deal in ICBMs your to far away (& too small) to bother me so best you go and do just that, I won't be overly concerned when you crashes (probably won't even remember you anyway!) So enjoy!!

[MRRPM]

Keep the pics coming. new ideas are good
Robert

[Wellydeckhand]

Originally Posted by Milan

She wasn't aircraft carrier, she was a battleship, biggest ever built. (Together with a Musashi her sister ship, at the 72 800 tons of fully loaded displacement).

Sinked accidently by american u-boat reader digest

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by FAST FRED

Work Camp or Goulag ? Which do you chose? FAST FRED

Guantanamo?

[safewalrus]

Careful Gilly I'm agreeing again!

[marshmat]

I do like the ship, Dook. It's good to see some innovation out there, especially in such a high-tech field.

I would like to mention one aspect of the design, relating to the UCAVs, that while not generally a concern of the USA, raises some serious ethical questions from the rest of the world. When the field of robotics began to develop some fifty years ago, the core ethics of the field were summarized quite succinctly by Asimov:
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
The very concept of the UCAV is to develop a robot which, without a human operator and entirely of its own volition, will hunt down and kill human beings. Many of us in the scientific community are troubled by the thought that ethics and morals that were originally at the heart of our work are being so readily trampled with no regard for the potential consequences. I suggest simply that anyone studying the design of military equipment keep this in mind.

[safewalrus]

Which is all well and good Marshmat but as we all know the idea of military equipment is to kill him quicker (and deader) than he can kill you!

This has been a 'standard' law since the invention of the 'club' even before bows and arrows!

It could be an interesting scenario under the first law of robotics when 'our' robots come up against their 'soldiers' trying to kill 'our' soldiers - melt down at a guess!

How does your inventor proceed in this situation?

[water addict]

trust me - there are scores of reasons your design would not be a good carrier.

thats about all i can say

[safewalrus]

Whats this? a Naval Architect I agree with! Totally agree with you 'Addict and I bet I can think of a few you can't and vice versa!

[FAST FRED]

"Guantanamo?"

This is an excellent example of the kindness of the Americans.

Bu Intl law , and the Geneva Convention from the early 1800's soldiers are given rights.

However spys and other "irregular" fighters (folks that are NOT in a uniform) are NOT SOLDIERS and are given a Summary Exicution.

Since the US gov has not exicuted these facists and keeps them alive in far better conditions, than they ever knew existed in their home town , at US Taxpayer expense , its an act of kindness , that goes FAR beyond legal requirements.

My choice would be the hangmans rope , as a firing squad is ONLY for soldiers.

FAST FRED

[safewalrus]

So do it Fred! Is it fair to keep these people for no reason in such unfriendly conditions (some of them actually come from better places than were they were found! which was NOT their homeland - yes they were and still are traitors but you wouldn't keep a dog like that let alone a human - Must remember your comments about "irregulars" Fred (folks that are NOT in a uniform)! there are times when this covers American Special forces, but of course they are sh** as they don't stand in long lines and fire their muskets at each other or wear pretty dress that is as same as the next guy! I've known a few who would disagree with your definition there Fred, so I suggest you be a little careful what you chuck!

Incidentally whilst I've made the stand above I believe that (as I said earlier) the inmates of Guantanamo Bay Prison should never have got there, on arrest they should have been interrogated on the spot and summarily dealt with on the spot (slotted or freed as required), the same with Mr S. Hussain dealt with on the spot - too bloody busy making records and being seen to be fair! gives the rest of the world every chance of proving otherwise! Don't pansy with 'em, slot em! Gives a clearer message - "fu** with us and you get sorted"!!

[Wellydeckhand]

Guantanamo...........? Its a prison with in house junkies

[Guillermo]

Coming back to the thread's topic, here you have an interesting paper on the 21st century carrier force, written in 1997:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/s.../970100-dp.htm

[safewalrus]

Well, and I thought the Aircraft Carrier was a British invention, there again so was America, (we had to dump our rubbish somewhere) we can't get it right every time can we?