An idea good on paper but never will fly? Literally so!
"Lockheed nuclear Powered Flying Aircraft Carrier – We have the tech now, but… "
Atomic torpedo [Russian]. Atomic cruise missile [Russian]. The flying American aircraft carrier. Nuclear powered? Absurd. The "thing" will be so heavy with all the necessary shielding that the plane will not even be able to take off. Kept aloft for months [or longer?] no respite for the crew, supply a constant problem [generals think logistics].
THE FLYING AIRCRAFT CARRIER. ATOMIC POWERED. THIS ALMOST SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING THE RUSSIANS MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN.
"Would cost 11+ bln today [$11 billion USD per plane not including the two dozen or so multi-role combat-aircraft] and now do-able if we wanted. A ridiculous plan in the past… but now?"
Atomic torpedo [Russian]. Atomic cruise missile [Russian]. The flying American aircraft carrier. Nuclear powered? Absurd. The "thing" will be so heavy with all the necessary shielding that the plane will not even be able to take off. Kept aloft for months [or longer?] no respite for the crew, supply a constant problem [generals think logistics].
AND IF THE "THING" CRASHES THEN THINK OF ALL THE NUCLEAR DEBRIS SPREAD FAR AND WIDE.
Dismiss this idea out of hand. Cost as well prohibitive. Although a state-of-the-art Ford class aircraft carrier as currently sent to sea by the U.S. Navy is comparable in cost.
"out of hand: 2. Without due discussion or consideration."
Perhaps dismissing "out of hand" all for the best!
coolbert.
No comments:
Post a Comment