What would be the theoretical maximum size of an aircraft carrier?
>>64702018Roughly smaller than your mom
>>64702020LOL owned, how will he recover? XDDD
>>64702018There's a limit to the width since ships need to fit through the Panama and Suez canals, but there's no limit to the length
>>64702116i'd figure at some point length succumbs to stress damage from various torques but i'd love to hear an expert talk about whereabouts the limit exists, considering both the limitations of our building materials and practicality and use case
>>64702018The biggest basket you want all your eggs in before just building a second carrier as backup.
>>64702018IIRC hulls can't be over 1km long due to the height difference the water can have over that distance in a storm.Still you could have seperate hulls on pivots connected to a single deck to exceed that limt.
ENTER HABAKKUK
Instead of making them longer, should be making them multilevel instead
>>64702020>Giantess motherHot
>>64702126if you're gonna make a bunch of ships nunchucked together one might get to thinking it's better to just have a bunch of independent ships instead of one big ship
>>64702018moot question, considering both F-18 and Su-33/Su-27K need more than the Jahre Viking's length for conventional takeoff/landing
>>64702018Finnish cruise line shipyards should be forced to make militarized version with horizontally launching missiles for missile barrage broadsides.
>>64702142He said theoretical maximum size not maximum practical size.Realistically carriers are more cost limited than anything else, how much are you willing to risk?
>>64702159I guess then we're going to get critical of the definition of a singular ship, if we can tether many small ships together and call it one.
>>64702170Catamarans and Trimarans exist and seem to answer that.
>>64702179>three aircraft carriers all in tandem linked by bridges. >the aircraft carrier can now launch plans in any directionthat would be exciting to see
>>64702018The limits of the metal, with respect to performance and damage requiremenrs. I'll just make an uneducated guess that it's 25-50% less than the world's largest cargo ships, which puts the range around 140-200k tons.
>>64702233Why link them together instead of having two carriers with their own strike groups?
>>64702018>What would be the theoretical maximum size of an aircraft carrier?Bigger than the Knock Nevis. So we're talking about maybe something 500 thousand tons, maybe up to a million metric tons.
>>64702116When will they stretch those tight canals bigger already?
>>64702248see >>64702159
>>64702159The practical size is dictated by the size of the air group. And the practical limit for air group size is around 100 planes. Any more than that and you start to run into command and control issues.
>>64702018>Queen Elizabeth ocean cruise liner>Obviously a Freedom class ship from Royal Caribbean>Looks nothing like the Queen ElizabethI want to hurt whoever made this
We have a big one already
>>64702116Panama canal has locks that limit the length.The Suez canal doesn't have locks but it's not perfectly straight either.
