Beyond The Sprues

Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Scenarios => Topic started by: upnorth on July 18, 2013, 03:59:52 PM

Title: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: upnorth on July 18, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
I've often mulled over the possibility of the Soviet navy being involved in the Pacific Theatre of WWII as a carrier equipped force.

Say Japan launched a serious offensive up the Kamchatka Peninsula to attack Vladivostok to grab land further north to stage attacks into Alaska.

Through lend-lease, the Soviets could get carriers and relevant aircraft to help deal with the issue in the north Pacific while American and Commonwealth forces stayed focused on matters further south.

Granted, I haven't really looked deeply into the real world plausibility of the concept.

However, I've always thought that the Hellcat, Corsair, Firefly and Avenger would look super cool with the Red Star on them.

Navalized Yak-3, Yak-9, La-7 and Pe-2 variants also would be pretty cool.

What do you folks say?
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 18, 2013, 05:15:44 PM
Some real world Soviet carrier designs:

Project 69AV (1945): Kronshtadt class battlecruiser conversion into carrier
Project 71A (1936): 13,000-ton Light Carrier Design
 Project 71B (1937): 22,000-ton Fleet Carrier Design
Project 72 (1942): 37,000-ton Fleet Carrier Design

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo_zpsac175e49.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo_zps7e6a507d.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo_zpsdf3f2a1f.jpg)
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Spey Phantom on July 18, 2013, 06:40:50 PM
interesting thought, would have made the upcoming cold was very interesting.
some carrier based Su-2's, Mig-3, maybe even a Mig-9  8)

http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=280478 (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=280478)


found these on Google images

(http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc316/Novgorodsfleet/CVPrKostromitinov.png)

(http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc316/Novgorodsfleet/CVPr71.png)

(http://s019.radikal.ru/i632/1305/69/fd41ef67f8ce.png)

(http://img473.imageshack.us/img473/8638/kostromitinova1py2uc.jpg)
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Cliffy B on July 18, 2013, 09:14:53 PM
Check out these threads over on Secret Projects for a nice compilation of designs.  You'll need to be a member though to see the images.

Carriers:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1948.0.html (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1948.0.html)

Aircraft:  Check out the TBF-like torpedo bomber design  8)
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,356.0.html (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,356.0.html)

To add to Greg's list:

Project 66AV or 68AV? (1953): Carrier design based on Project 66 Heavy Cruiser or Sverdlov class Light Cruiser?
Project 69AV (1945): Kronshtadt class Battle Cruiser conversion into Carrier
Project 71A (1936): 13,000-ton Light Carrier Design
Project 71B (1937): 22,000-ton Fleet Carrier Design
Project 72 (1942): 37,000-ton Fleet Carrier Design
Project 85 (1954): 30,500-ton Light Carrier design
Project 1020.0 (1980): 30,000-ton Helicopter Carrier design
Project 1058.1 (1937): 74,000-ton Battle Carrier design (Gibbs & Cox project)
Project 1123 (1962): Moskva class Helicopter Carrier
Project 1123.3 (1968): Modernized Moskva class Helicopter Carrier design
Project 1143.0 (1970): Kiev class Carrier
Project 1143.2 (1972): Modified Kiev class Carrier Minsk
Project 1143.3 (1975): Improved Kiev class Carrier Novorossiysk
Project 1143.4 (1978): Kiev Mod class Carrier Baku
Project 1143.5 (1982): Admiral Kuznetsov class Carrier
Project 1143.5M (??): Modernized Admiral Kuznetsov class Carrier design
Project 1143.6 (1985): Modified Admiral Kuznetsov class Carrier
Project 1143.7 (1988): Ulyanovsk Class nuclear-powered Carrier
Project 1153 (1977): 70,000-ton Nuclear powered Carrier design
Project 1160 (1972): 80,000-ton Nuclear powered Carrier design
Project 1178 (1990): 44,000-ton Helicopter Carrier design


I found these on the net somewhere and are the only "high-res" versions of any of the designs I could find.  I cleaned them up and re-oriented the top down view to align with the rest of the views.  They were pointing to the left while every other view was to the right  ??? 

Make sure you click on them to get the full size versions.

Project 69AV:
(http://i647.photobucket.com/albums/uu194/CliffyB/Project69AV2.jpg) (http://s647.photobucket.com/user/CliffyB/media/Project69AV2.jpg.html)

Project 71:  Best I can tell its based on a Sverdlov CL as well.  If you compare the hull sections and inboard profiles they are a match!  Think I've found another project!!!
(http://i647.photobucket.com/albums/uu194/CliffyB/Project71CV.jpg) (http://s647.photobucket.com/user/CliffyB/media/Project71CV.jpg.html)

Project 72:
(http://i647.photobucket.com/albums/uu194/CliffyB/Project72CV.jpg) (http://s647.photobucket.com/user/CliffyB/media/Project72CV.jpg.html)

Project Kostromitinov CV:  (No idea what the Project # is...anyone??)
(http://i647.photobucket.com/albums/uu194/CliffyB/ProjectKostromitinovCV.jpg) (http://s647.photobucket.com/user/CliffyB/media/ProjectKostromitinovCV.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 19, 2013, 02:22:28 AM
I have also long thought of a Soviet Carrier force.  for a WWII or just post WWII scenario, I would consider either Il-2/Il-10 in the strike role, possibly with torpedo or maybe a SU-2.  In the Fighter role, either Yak-9 or Yak-3 or La-5/7/9?
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Weaver on July 19, 2013, 09:29:53 AM
Slightly off at a tangent, what if the Soviet Union had been an early adopter of carriers? Say in whiff world, the Russian Civil War either never happened or was wrapped up more quickly, so the Soviets were able to put more effort into developing their navy from the late '20s onwards. You might then see Soviet carriers by the late 1930s, equipped with adapted Polikarpov biplanes, indeed the need for slow landing speeds might mean it's the Soviet Navy, rather than the Spanish Civil War, which is the catalyst for a generation of "ultimate biplanes" in the I-152/I-153 style. The I-152 would be adaptable as a dive-bomber in the Hs-123 mould, while a torpedo bomber version of the Polkarpov R-Z would seem doable (there was a real torpedo version of the earlier R-5), perhaps with a radial rather than inline engine.

The Soviet Union helped China in it's war with the Japanese in the late 1930's, so maybe with a carrier force, you could imagine them challenging Japanese carriers off the Chinese coast, thus leading to the world's first carrier-to carrier battles.
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: jcf on July 19, 2013, 02:43:44 PM
Kamchatka is still mostly wilderness today and was even more so in the WWII period.
The geography, very active vulcanism and being mostly snow covered from October to
May are not conducive to military operations, and the IJA were definitely not equipped
to deal with the Peninsula.

Anyhow, Vladivostok is well to the south and west of Kamchatka, so there would be no
reason to attack up Kamchatka to take Vladivostok.
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: finsrin on July 19, 2013, 03:15:13 PM
Slightly off at a tangent, what if the Soviet Union had been an early adopter of carriers? ...............

The Soviet Union helped China in it's war with the Japanese in the late 1930's, so maybe with a carrier force, you could imagine them challenging Japanese carriers off the Chinese coast, thus leading to the world's first carrier-to carrier battles.

Well stated and interesting topic to contemplate and then to kitbash.  :)
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: upnorth on July 19, 2013, 09:07:59 PM
Kamchatka is still mostly wilderness today and was even more so in the WWII period.
The geography, very active vulcanism and being mostly snow covered from October to
May are not conducive to military operations, and the IJA were definitely not equipped
to deal with the Peninsula.

Anyhow, Vladivostok is well to the south and west of Kamchatka, so there would be no
reason to attack up Kamchatka to take Vladivostok.

Yup! You got me on that! (Where's that face palm smiley when you need it)   :-[

Thankfully I don't run guided tours of eastern Russia! ;D

Still, poor geography aside, the area around Vladivostok is not without mineral wealth so could be worth attacking for the ore deposits.

As for further off the coast, even if we don't go so far as the Kamchatka, there is the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island which were a real bone of contention between the Soviets and Japan for several years before WWII and even after it.

Supposing the Soviet-Japanese border conflicts carry on as an active aspect of WWII rather than the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact of 1941 being made.  In that alone, there may be scope for Soviet-Japanese carrier conflict in the Sea of Okhotsk and the Sea of Japan.

Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 20, 2013, 03:22:01 AM
Slightly off at a tangent, what if the Soviet Union had been an early adopter of carriers? Say in whiff world, the Russian Civil War either never happened or was wrapped up more quickly, so the Soviets were able to put more effort into developing their navy from the late '20s onwards. You might then see Soviet carriers by the late 1930s, equipped with adapted Polikarpov biplanes, indeed the need for slow landing speeds might mean it's the Soviet Navy, rather than the Spanish Civil War, which is the catalyst for a generation of "ultimate biplanes" in the I-152/I-153 style. The I-152 would be adaptable as a dive-bomber in the Hs-123 mould, while a torpedo bomber version of the Polkarpov R-Z would seem doable (there was a real torpedo version of the earlier R-5), perhaps with a radial rather than inline engine.



Well, there were these designs from 1925:

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/MFrunze_zps80d9378f.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/Izmail_zpsbcb11f5d.jpg)

"Mikhail Frunze" up to 50 aircraft
"Izmail" - 12 torpedo bombers (bombers), 12 fighters, 6 recon., + 5 aircraft for special purposes. Displacement 20000-22000t., Length 224m., Speed 27 knots. The maximum number of aircraft to 50.

and this one from 1927:

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/Komsomolets_zps46448665.jpg)

"Komsomolets" 1927 - 16 bombers, 26 fighters. Dimensions deck 137 x 22m. Displacement 12000t.

Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 20, 2013, 03:52:16 AM
As yet another spin on this theme, what if the USSR acquired some ex-IJN carriers at the end of the war?  Say the Japanese tried to avoid the USN and send some of their carriers north or towards Korea and that they were somehow either captured or surrendered to the Russians.  Instead of then returning them, the ships are repaired and brought into service equipped with Russian designs (which also aid from an injection of Japanese Carrier aircraft designs elements).  Say escort carrier such as the Kaiyo:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Kaiyō.jpg)
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/images/kaiyo.gif)

and some more major ones such as the Jun'yō:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Junyo.jpg)

and/or the Katsuragi:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Katsuragi.jpg)
(http://www.1999.co.jp/itbig03/10034136t2.jpg)

Maybe even somehow have copies of the A7M Reppū and B7A Ryusei fall into Russian hands and then get developed?
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Logan Hartke on July 20, 2013, 04:34:30 AM
Any 1930s carrier fighters would probably need to be I-152 based but that shouldn't be an issue.  They'd probably make a decent carrier fighter.  It would have to be an I-152 as the I-15 and I-153 would inhibit visibility too much.  I sure wouldn't want to have to try to fly an I-16 from a carrier, though.  That thing was a handful under normal conditions.  On the upside, you'd probably be able to fit a few dozen on even the smallest carriers, though!

Cheers,

Logan
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 20, 2013, 04:51:36 AM
Would the I-153 (see below) really been much worse than the Grumman F3F (also below)?

(http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/russia/pol_i-153.gif)
(http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/usa/grumman_f3f.gif)

Either way, I have one of these in my stash that is going to become a '30s Soviet Carrier Fighter:

(http://modelsua.com/images/D/AMG48302.jpg)
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Logan Hartke on July 20, 2013, 05:04:15 AM
Yeah, I think so.  It has everything to do with the wing configuration on the I-15 and I-153.  It's easy enough to address, but they would need to have the straight wing of the I-15bis and I-152 to have sufficient visibility down and forward for carrier landings.

Cheers,

Logan
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Jeffry Fontaine on July 20, 2013, 05:23:33 AM
If the Russian carriers are large enough and some imagination applied it is not too far of a stretch in reality to consider a carrier capable A-20 Havoc.  The Russian Navy Aviation did use the Havoc as a torpedo bomber and with some embellishment of details you could have folding wings, tail hook and a rather interesting accessory for your Russian aircraft carrier. 
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Weaver on July 20, 2013, 09:20:35 AM
Yeah, I think so.  It has everything to do with the wing configuration on the I-15 and I-153.  It's easy enough to address, but they would need to have the straight wing of the I-15bis and I-152 to have sufficient visibility down and forward for carrier landings.

Cheers,

Logan

Having given it more thought, I agree with this. You could always have a hybrid "I-152.5" fighter with the conventional top wing for vision and the I-153's retractable gear for speed, while the dive-bomber would be an I-152 with a beefed-up structure, dive brakes and fixed gear to make space for the bomb.
Title: Re: Soviet Carrier Force in WWII
Post by: Weaver on July 20, 2013, 09:31:30 AM
If they clung to biplanes for some reason (conservatism? Small carriers?), they could get another round of development by navalising this:

(http://www.super-hobby.com/zdjecia/8/9/8/1573_rd.jpg)

Basically an I-153 with a Shvestov M-88 14-cyl radial (never got beyond a prototype IRL). It'd need an I-152 top wing, of course.