Hacker News Reader

Comment by m0nastic | Hacker News Reader

I would think that it would make a terrible super-yacht. The interior would have to be completely redone, and I think the average fuel consumption for a non-nuclear powered aircraft carrier is ~ 6 inches/gallon.

The only appeal of an aircraft carrier from a usability perspective is it's intended purpose of landing aircraft (otherwise you'd be much better off with a cruiser); so unless you are planning on landing aircraft (and have both the necessary crew and an aircraft capable of a carrier landing), it's sort of silly.

View on HN

Also, the only aircraft this thing can actually handle are Harriers and helicopters. And nobody will sell you a Harrier. So all you've got is a yacht with an oversized helipad, which is no better than any other billionaire.

But how many other yachts have a golf course?

Was talking to my brother about this earlier today, and I was saying the exact same thing.

As a purchase goes, it is totally pointless. Even as a golf course ... it would be a very boring course.

Given the size of the thing, the crew you would need for it, that it is at best a glorified helipad, and one that is nearly 40 years old,

Good point. You could use it for unmanned drones.

Actually that could be super cool. You could have your own fleet of unmanned drones able to do your bidding on a global scale.

Except if you did manage to think of a use for a fleet of unmanned drones you wouldn't need an aircraft carrier to launch them anyway. A field would be just as good.

Unless fuel or other concerns limit their operating range and you want to deploy them someplace overseas. Kind of like why we used them for aircraft, which can also be launched from a field.

To combat piracy, your drones would protect the ship of whoever bids highest for your services. Could save tens of millions in ransom fees.

Not to mention the engines are removed and the pumps and other equipment is considered "generally unserviceable"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com