Beyond The Sprues

Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Sea => Topic started by: GTX_Admin on January 14, 2012, 10:19:29 AM

Title: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 14, 2012, 10:19:29 AM
Hi folks,

An area for your Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Principe-de-Asturias_Wasp_Forrestal_Invincible_1991_DN-ST-92-01129s.jpg)

Regards,

Greg
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on January 14, 2012, 03:27:03 PM
(http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/dy031101/Parallel%20World%20and%20What-if/PRC_CVL_Chongqing_2_AU.gif)

(The above pic was based very loosely on a Hong Kong comic but now follows the proper PLAN ship naming convention- so nope, that ex-Varyag would very unlikely be called Shi-Lang even if we leave out the "turncoat for the Manchu" details.)

Those bigger guns are single 130mm upgraded to fire guided shells (originally developed for Luda class DDG), BTW:
(http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/dy031101/Parallel%20World%20and%20What-if/130mmGuidedShell.jpg)

=========================================================

What if Tienanmen Square Incident did not occur soon enough......

(http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/dy031101/Parallel%20World%20and%20What-if/PAK-CVS-CSSC-SCS-1-AU.gif)

(The gist of the picture: SCS evolution passed to the PRC, who in turn built a CVS for Pakistan.)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 15, 2012, 04:16:25 PM
A couple of ideas.  What about turning either the Wasp class LHD or the Invincible class light Carriers into conventional carriers with angled decks and either catapults or STOBAR style ski jump?

Regards,

Greg
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on January 16, 2012, 02:03:52 AM
Not really a conversion, but a "what if it's built this way?" kind of thing.

(http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/dy031101/Parallel%20World%20and%20What-if/GB-CVS-Invincible_-CATOBAR-1-AU.gif)

Yes, I realized that I have not got around making a top view.  :-X
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 16, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
I see what you have done.  I wonder what aircraft would have been suitable in the '80's/'90s timeframe.  Maybe A-7s as replacements for A-4s?  Sea Jaguars?  Naval BAE Hawk 100/200s?

Regards,

Greg
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on January 16, 2012, 03:10:58 AM
Maybe A-7s as replacements for A-4s? 

That's what I thought, too.

Sea Jaguar...... I forgot about its weight and takeoff performance compared to the Buccaneer and Sea Vixen (I mentioned those two for being the final airwing onboard a Centaur class carrier, whose size I mimicked for the Shipbucket pic).
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on January 16, 2012, 03:25:44 AM
Production Sea Jaguar with the radar nose and LRMTS underneath and most definitely with the later, more powerful Adour versions if not re-engined with M45s (engines proposed for the AFVG).  For light attack, perhaps a cross between the Hawk 200 and the T-45 and sold as an AT-45 for use on some of the USN's smaller carriers?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 16, 2012, 04:54:35 AM
I wonder...conventional (i.e. non VTOL) Harrier/Sea Harrier anyone?

Alternately, a naval AMX?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on January 16, 2012, 10:34:48 AM
Navalised AMX is a sexy idea in a world where Italy had the will/money to build a small conventional carrier instread of the Garibaldi, because AMX development was shared with Brazil and they have a small carrier too.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: sequoiaranger on January 17, 2012, 12:50:27 AM
I have the materials for a build of a slightly-stretched Yorktown-class carrier with an angled deck. The Essex-class Antietam model (1/700) has the early-style angled deck, and I am hoping to mate that to a semi-Yorktown hull/superstructure. I made a 1/1200 angled-deck Enterprise (no lengthening) a long time ago, and liked the concept. My "Furashita's Fleet" has my concept in the form of "Bon Homme Richard":

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/bonhom_f.htm (http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/bonhom_f.htm)

I will have some "Douglas Decimators" on the deck! Not near the top of my to-build list, but ON the list!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on January 18, 2012, 07:12:55 AM
Use two kits of Forrestal to NImitz class and build as cattamaran class. Delete one island.  One side is primary for takeoff other is primary for landings.  With full deck length for takeoff/landing and a megacatapult to launch C-17 C-130 Privateer B-57 B-58...... whatever you want to navalize or stick with naval aircraft.  A swarm of F8F, F4U-4, A-1
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 21, 2012, 09:24:00 AM
I got inspired by a recent post on the F-14 thread to create a carrier for an operator of a stripped-down (as built) version of the F-14.

(It should be more than 4 hours since I posted the current version already, so the below-mentioned changes should all be visible now.) (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=212.msg9539#msg9539)

Basically I took an existing drawing of a QE-style CV and replaced some visibly-advanced features (island, for example) with older ones, adding a couple of others (like a bow bridle catcher), and giving the result a sensor suite equivalent to a Sea Control Ship.  The Ka-27 is there because I was also toying with the idea of Russians going after hard currencies...... even though I haven't even decided what country that stripped-down F-14 operator might be or if it'll go straight into parallel universe category altogether.

Is there such concerns as "the electronics suite being inadequate to control the F-14s"?  Or am I just thinking too much?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 25, 2012, 04:27:54 AM
Does anyone know if it is possible to get a kit of the Catapult launcher as proposed for the Graf Zeppelin:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Bf109T_Katapult.jpg/800px-Bf109T_Katapult.jpg) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Bf109T_Katapult.jpg)
(Click on image for High Rez view)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: sequoiaranger on March 08, 2012, 01:52:50 AM
Example:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/nibai_f.htm (http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/nibai_f.htm)

Do-able??
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 08, 2012, 02:35:10 AM
Definitely doable...just not cheap!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 20, 2012, 02:36:48 AM
Not necessarily inspiring though perhaps of use for detailing: http://igor113.livejournal.com/27473.html (http://igor113.livejournal.com/27473.html)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on April 16, 2012, 11:53:58 AM
The question began when I remembered reading somewhere that Yak-41 (a.k.a. Yak-141) is primarily intended for shore-based operation as its exhaust heat is considered too hot even for the heat-resistant materials available for the former Soviets to build flight decks with.

I wonder if having the aircraft hovering alongside the ship rather than directly over the ship itself would help alleviate the problem......

Also, is there other STOVL designs (East and West, of all timeframes) that might have the same "too hot for carrier flight deck" problem?  I mean Mirage IIIV, VJ-101, D188A, and a few others from the West also uses liftjets.  How far along is the West when it comes to making heat-resistant flight deck?

Actually, how different a challenge is fabricating a flight deck capable of supporting the above-mentioned aircraft from, say, the jet blast deflectors on CATOBAR or STOBAR carriers?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on April 16, 2012, 12:30:08 PM
I suspect that a naval P.1154 taking off with full PCB engaged would quite warm up a deck.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on April 19, 2012, 09:41:00 AM
How much demand would rolling takeoff bring to a flight deck compared to hovering?

=============================================================

My first thought when seeing the attached picture is "why would you put a proper through-deck and skijump together with skyhook cranes?"

What's your opinion?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 21, 2012, 03:11:51 AM
Maybe to use the skyhook for landings but to use the ski-jump for takeoffs since it allows potentially a greater payload to be carried.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 29, 2012, 03:32:58 AM
Useful comparison between the old HMAS Melbourne, the recently retired HMAS Kanimbla and the new Canberra class LHDs (also shown at the bottom) being acquired by the RAN:

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/LHDPicture2.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/LHDPicture1.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/LHDPicture3.png)

Now, I wonder...what about a CVL based on the Canberra class/Juan Carlos class...

Remove the ski jump, add an angled deck, add catapults and arrestor gear...
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Cliffy B on April 29, 2012, 03:40:09 AM
ONLY if you knock the height of the deck down by a large amount.  Holy gigantic radar signature Batman!!!!  They might as well paint giant bulls-eyes on the sides....
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: RussC on April 29, 2012, 08:25:39 PM
ONLY if you knock the height of the deck down by a large amount.  Holy gigantic radar signature Batman!!!!  They might as well paint giant bulls-eyes on the sides....

Remember , its not the size - its the angles.

Why does that sound like it could really be smut-tied?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 30, 2012, 02:31:22 AM

Remember , its not the size - its the angles.

Why does that sound like it could really be smut-tied?

You have a dirty mind...mind you, so do I! :-[
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on May 16, 2012, 11:33:30 PM
Not sure if this is the right place for this, but these pics landed in my inbox today, China's new carrier.

Thing is, is this for real or what -----
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: RussC on May 17, 2012, 12:05:33 AM
Not sure if this is the right place for this, but these pics landed in my inbox today, China's new carrier.

Thing is, is this for real or what -----

  I would say its a what-if (Sorry about using the W- word here !) of some origin. The Carnival Cruise Ship bridge is pretty cool though. I wonder if there is a jacuzzi on it somewhere - I would add one!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on May 17, 2012, 04:25:21 AM
Thing is, is this for real or what -----


Its about as real as this being the new Japanese battleship:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xGv6vaj378o/TWeYM5aukuI/AAAAAAAABK0/0-w-IiLhT3Y/s1600/yamato.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: raafif on May 17, 2012, 05:35:54 AM
it's as real as the Chinese copy of the B2 bomber et al that appears on t'Net ;)

Would be cool tho ! Just the thing DML should put out as a kit :P
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 17, 2012, 07:10:17 AM
  I would say its a what-if (Sorry about using the W- word here !)

There is no reason to apologise!  We do focus on whatif style modelling here in all its forms.  There is absolutely no monopoly upon the term and thus there is no reason to not use it here.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 17, 2012, 07:12:52 AM
Thing is, is this for real or what -----


Its about as real as this being the new Japanese battleship:

([url]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xGv6vaj378o/TWeYM5aukuI/AAAAAAAABK0/0-w-IiLhT3Y/s1600/yamato.jpg[/url])


Appropriate response.  Some of these Chinese fan art style creations that pop up every few months really belong more in the world of Manga then anywhere else.  I remember this particular one going round with a fanciful email telling everyone to be afraid... ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on May 18, 2012, 08:02:00 PM
The question began when I remembered reading somewhere that Yak-41 (a.k.a. Yak-141) is primarily intended for shore-based operation as its exhaust heat is considered too hot even for the heat-resistant materials available for the former Soviets to build flight decks with.

I wonder if having the aircraft hovering alongside the ship rather than directly over the ship itself would help alleviate the problem......

Also, is there other STOVL designs (East and West, of all timeframes) that might have the same "too hot for carrier flight deck" problem?  I mean Mirage IIIV, VJ-101, D188A, and a few others from the West also uses liftjets.  How far along is the West when it comes to making heat-resistant flight deck?

Actually, how different a challenge is fabricating a flight deck capable of supporting the above-mentioned aircraft from, say, the jet blast deflectors on CATOBAR or STOBAR carriers?

The too hot for flight deck VTOL thing is mostly unsupported. The exhaust flow at full power is usually very limited in time enabling the deck to recover. Hovering over or beside the ship isn’t the issue but the last seconds before touch down. Also you can cool the deck (run water through pipes under it) or use a grill with jet blast channelling like on Soviet ships.

The biggest flight deck problem I know of was the F-4K Phantom cross decking onto US Essex class. Because the Phantom’s jets are canted downwards and the Spey produced a lot of extra mass flow and velocity in the exhaust it set the wooden flight deck on fire. But these Phantoms had no problems on their own carriers. It’s all about designing the plane for the ship and the ship for the plane.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on May 19, 2012, 09:03:39 PM
Hovering over or beside the ship isn’t the issue but the last seconds before touch down.


I brought this one up because I was doing a Shipbucket drawing of a Skyhook carrier, which does not use flight deck as the primary mean of recovering aircraft (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=116.msg15533#msg15533)  ;D

Also you can cool the deck (run water through pipes under it) or use a grill with jet blast channelling like on Soviet ships.


Did the Soviet anticipate naval use when the Yak-41 was still on the table?  So far as I have read, some said no and others didn't even bother.

The biggest flight deck problem I know of was the F-4K Phantom cross decking onto US Essex class.


I know that it was thought to be do-able but never know that it was done before.  But it has to be done one ships with angled-deck modification, no?  And doesn't it have metal flight deck?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 11, 2012, 04:30:26 AM
(http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/1105/nuclear-carrier-navy-carrier-nuclear-awesome-military-demotivational-posters-1305846990.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on June 21, 2012, 01:53:04 PM
In the stash we bought is a 1/700 Shinano. 
Figuring the sinking story was a cover for Shinano taking only one torpedeo which slowed it and kept Japanese busy with damage repair while first ever RAN/USN Seal team snuck aboard then took over.  All it took was one radioman coerced with offerings of Hershey bars and cigarettes into radioing IJN that all is lost and last of crew was abandoning ship.  Where upon RAN/USN sailed it to Australia for study and repair.  In mid 1950's Shinano was refitted by RAN with contemporary systems, an angle deck, renamed to ???.  With successive modernizations the former Shinano served into the 1990's or is it still serving today with 21st Century systems and aircraft?
Decided to keep the kit in hopes building as configured in one of decades from 1950's to ?
Bill
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: RussC on June 21, 2012, 11:58:49 PM
In the stash we bought is a 1/700 Shinano. 
Figuring the sinking story was a cover for Shinano taking only one torpedeo which slowed it and kept Japanese busy with damage repair while first ever RAN/USN Seal team snuck aboard then took over.  All it took was one radioman coerced with offerings of Hershey bars and cigarettes into radioing IJN that all is lost and last of crew was abandoning ship.  Where upon RAN/USN sailed it to Australia for study and repair.  In mid 1950's Shinano was refitted by RAN with contemporary systems, an angle deck, renamed to ???.  With successive modernizations the former Shinano served into the 1990's or is it still serving today with 21st Century systems and aircraft?
Decided to keep the kit in hopes building as configured in one of decades from 1950's to ?
Bill


Excellent concept! With a concrete flight deck, could have served with updates , including reactors - until present day. Would have an angled deck eventually along with deck edge elevators. Current airwing would be Hornets hopefully not in boredom gray.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 21, 2012, 03:08:28 AM
RFS Vladivostok,DCNS concept - modified French Mistral class amphibious assault ship (BPC/LHD)for Russia:

(http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_LHD_BPC_Vladivostok_Concept_DCNS_lg.jpg)

The first BPC is scheduled for delivery in 2014, the second will be delivered in 2015.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Logan Hartke on July 21, 2012, 03:57:13 AM
Neat.  I was looking for an image of one with Russian modifications earlier today.  Looks neat with the Russian CIWS on the stern.

Anyone else still half-expect to see the deck painted green?

Cheers,

Logan
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on August 27, 2012, 09:36:09 AM
Someone made Shipbucket-grade drawings of the Japanese helicopter carrier (pre-Hyuga; rejected in favour of Haruna- and Shirane-class DDHs) project here (http://www.pixiv.net/tags.php?tag=shipbucket.com%E8%A6%8F%E6%A0%BC).
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Cliffy B on August 27, 2012, 10:44:58 AM
You have to join or be a member to see anything larger than thumbnail  :-\  From what I can see they look rather neat though.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: TerryCampion on September 24, 2012, 10:10:04 PM
Found this one....
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on October 07, 2012, 11:44:18 AM
Old news by now...... but I told you PRC ain't gonna name their first carrier after a turncoat, didn't I (http://china-defense.blogspot.ca/2012/09/commissioning-ceremony-of-chinese.html)?  ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on December 02, 2012, 04:32:00 AM
Turkey to build first domestic aircraft carrier (http://en.trend.az/news/politics/2093392.html) - sounds very much like a LHD/LHA to me.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on December 02, 2012, 05:50:26 AM
Turkey to build first domestic aircraft carrier ([url]http://en.trend.az/news/politics/2093392.html[/url]) - sounds very much like a LHD/LHA to me.

Indeed.  what would be most "interesting" is if the final design had a "ski-jump".
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on December 02, 2012, 06:34:12 AM
I wonder if you will see Greece wanting one now...not that they could afford it.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on December 02, 2012, 06:49:30 AM
I wonder if you will see Greece wanting one now...not that they could afford it.
I wonder how much they'd have to hock to afford and equip one?  I wouldn't wonder if one could pick up some recently used aircraft that way.  It could make for interesting whifs with various customers purchasing some of their older aircraft.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 20, 2013, 05:05:31 AM
A 'little' bit of inspiration:

(http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2013/01/11/carrier%20560.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 16, 2013, 05:21:02 AM
I'm brainstorming on a fictional ship with aviation facility comparable to that of the upcoming Indian carrier.  I am wondering, though, if I'd be stuck with helo-based AEW platforms, or if there is actually some fixed-wing STOL transport type that has potential as a basis......

Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: LemonJello on February 16, 2013, 05:42:39 AM
I'm brainstorming on a fictional ship with aviation facility comparable to that of the upcoming Indian carrier.  I am wondering, though, if I'd be stuck with helo-based AEW platforms, or if there is actually some fixed-wing STOL transport type that has potential as a basis......

Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.

MV-22?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 16, 2013, 06:05:05 AM
MV-22?

That one has been taken up by a previous work......  ;D

You did manage to remind me of the BA609  though......
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on February 16, 2013, 06:14:11 AM
MV-22?

That one has been taken up by a previous work......  ;D

You did manage to remind me of the BA609  though......
you'd be better off with a SV-22.  The A609 structural materials and finishes were not designed for a maritime environment while those of the V-22 were..
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 16, 2013, 06:51:09 AM
you'd be better off with a SV-22.  The A609 structural materials and finishes were not designed for a maritime environment while those of the V-22 were..

Can I hope to launch a S-2 off Vikramaditya's skijump?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on February 16, 2013, 08:38:24 AM
That is indeed an inspirational picture.
Looking for any of Gannet, Spiteful, Seafang, Sea Fury, Firefly, Sea Hornet.  Perhaps they are in hanger deck.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 16, 2013, 11:12:08 AM
Are you wanting it to be western or eastern in origin or don't care?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 16, 2013, 11:31:19 AM
Western origin first.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on February 16, 2013, 03:25:20 PM
First thought is a S-2T Turbo-Tracker with an upgraded turboprop.  My second thought would be to use an ASW  variant of an existing stol turboprop aircraft.  Alternatively, if you wanted something different but grounded in the real world, an operational ASW variant of NASA's QSTOL mod to the Buffalo.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: nils on February 16, 2013, 04:16:03 PM
there's always the Yak-44  :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44)

(http://paralay.net/atakr/4410.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 16, 2013, 05:04:54 PM
Ive got a doosy I have been toying with for over 20 years, changed a lot of times and still evolving as I learn more and revisit previous ideas realising they were just silly.  A big part of it is an alternate properly funded, properly established 1920's to date RAN FAA.

Slowly, very slowly actually, I have been building a collection of kits for this alternate RAN / RAN FAA.  There will be 1/700 ships and air groups as well as 1/72 and 1/48 aircraft.  Even though I started this years ago (late 80s) I have very little to show for it, all of the models I had completed have been lost, damaged or destroyed, many more are incomplete and none of my more recent efforts have been finished yet.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 16, 2013, 09:12:44 PM

The premise to this earlier, expanded RAN and RAN FAA is a notional enquiry, possibly a Royal Commission, held into the loss of so many Australian lives (over 60000 dead) during WWI.  Held during 1919 with the express intent of destroying the reputation and political career of one William Hughes (he had many enemies on both sides of the political spectrum) poor wording led to it becoming an in-depth examination of lessons learnt from the conflict and the foundation of one of the most detailed and progressive strategic policies on defence the world has ever seen.

Key elements covered included:
•   An independent airforce responsible for
o   Defence of Australia from strategic attack from the air
o   Aerial policing and initial defence of Australian territories
o   Establishment, maintenance and defence of a strategic aerial transport system.
o   Training of all Australian military air and ground crew
o   Certification, acceptance  and safety of all Australian military aircraft
•   Army
o   Formation of an Australian Regular Army
o   Motorisation of the new regular army and current militia
o   Formation of an armoured corps
o   Formation of a tactical air corps
o   Replacement of heavy artillery with tactical airpower
•   Navy
o   Formally becoming a separate entity from the RN while maintaining close links
o   Formation of a Fleet Air Arm
o   Acquisition of aircraft carriers
o   Rebuilding and expanding the submarine arm
o   Formation of a paramilitary coast guard
•   Establishment of multi service capabilities and doctrines, including training and development cadres.
o   Tri service tactical air power school
o   Marine warfare school
o   Airborne warfare school

Thinking to date of what could happen, obviously not all of the options but a mix.
•   Possible conversion of Indefatigable class BC into carrier in 1920's
•   Light carrier(s) based on County class cruiser in late 20's early 30's. 
•   An Ark Royal (and a Vanguard) ordered from the UK in the late 30's to counter the Japanese threat, initially serving with the RN with the out break of war but returning to Australia following Pearl Harbour.
•   Updated County class CVLs continue to be built through war
•   Implacable and Indefatigable transferred to RAN in 1945
•   Licence built Audacious or Malta class carriers built in Australia post war
•   Updated County Class CVLs modernised/completed to operate early generation jets
•   Implacable and Indefatigable modernised in Australia from mid 50's
•   Updated County Class CVLs modified into a variety of roles, LHP, CVH (ASW), CVHG, or sold to other navies.
•   Clemenceau selected as new CVL
•   CVA01 selected as new fleet carrier design
•   An Essex purchased late 60s, to make up for cancellation of CVA01
•   Victorious, Hermes and/or Eagle purchased early 70s to make up for cancellation of CVA01
•   Invincible design selected as basis of County class CVL replacement, design modified post Falkands built in Australia
•   Spruance APD and DDH replaces Modified County LPH, CVH, CVHG with Aust Invincibles swung into LPH role as required to support.
•   CVV selected to replace 40's and 50's built fleet carriers - cancelled, current ships modernised, life extended / canalised, based on condition.
•   Modified CdeG built in Australia, smaller than needed not really successful
•   Australia full partner in CVF, CTOL version to replace CVA's, STOVL version to replace CVL, Invincibles, Spruances.
These ideas mean almost any combination of carrier aircraft (real, conceptual or should have been) could be employed from their decks at various eras.

It gets even more fun when I start thinking about escorts which could have been built in Australia to modified or even indigenous designs.

The RAAF and Army threads are just as bad.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 17, 2013, 04:18:02 AM
Maybe something akin to a BN AEW Defender?

(http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/spy/bn2t/bn2t-2.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 18, 2013, 04:58:07 AM
Maybe something akin to a BN AEW Defender?

Does its Trislander sibling possess comparable takeoff and landing performance?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 18, 2013, 05:03:18 AM
I believe so...just with greater payload.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 18, 2013, 05:35:30 AM
I believe so...just with greater payload.

How would its extra length factor into its footprint on deck compared to the AEW Defender?  I found it easier to imagine using the short nose version as a basis though.

Also, how is its performance at altitude compared to the Sea King?  Could the greater payload also be translated into high-altitude performance aid somehow?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 02, 2013, 02:24:31 PM
The one depicted here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hawker_Hurricane_on_CAM_ship_catapult_c1941.jpg) doesn't seem all that complicated to untrained eyes...... I wonder what its advantages and weaknesses would be when used on a full-blown military aviation ship (aircraft carrier and the likes) as an alternative to steam catapult- if it has serious weaknesses, would non-access to steam catapult have potentially justified the adoption of rocket-driven catapults?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 02, 2013, 03:16:28 PM
Well there was this cartridge based launch system by AVPRO instead of a steam one:

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/225e651c.jpg?t=1237058264)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Caveman on March 03, 2013, 02:03:20 AM
I believe walruses etc were launched using existing ships main gun cartridges
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 03, 2013, 07:37:06 AM
Well there was this cartridge based launch system by AVPRO instead of a steam one...
I believe walruses etc were launched using existing ships main gun cartridges

...... yeah, forgot that one.

I'm a bit mixed up in terms of how that would work though.  The drawing shows that the caseless projectile would catch the nose landing gear of the airplane (the system is to launch the airplane, after all).  But if it functions like a large cannon, wouldn't any opening in any place of the system's "barrel/chamber" other than the muzzle a bad thing?  Or am I missing something here?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 03, 2013, 07:39:52 AM
The AVPRO ideas were just that, ideas.  They made lots of nice images but not a lot (if any) of engineering behind them.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 04, 2013, 10:27:41 AM
A quick question: would an AEW version of the BN Defender or Trilander be, by your estimation, be able to take off from the deck of a Kiev class cruiser without the use of skijump?

Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Caveman on March 05, 2013, 05:25:30 AM
I guess that depends on how fast a Kiev class cruiser can go!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 05, 2013, 05:30:01 AM
I guess that depends on how fast a Kiev class cruiser can go!

How fast does it need to when launching the STOL?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Caveman on March 05, 2013, 06:54:27 AM
[TLDR see bottom for conclusion]

Well thanks to wikipedia i now know that:
The take off run for a defender is 320m
And that its "minimum control" speed is 45 mph.

If you assume a constant acceleration for the takeoff run (i know drag is proportional to V^2 but it makes the maths easier...) you can get a value for the acceleration.

A small amount of fiddling will show that the takeoff distance can be described as:

v1=(da-1)/v2

where d is distance, v2 takeoff speed, v1 speed of the ship (and thus speed at the start of the takeoff run) and a acceleration

so you have a linear relationship between d and v1.

 :icon_sleep:  wake up at the back there!

now the Kiev  O0 is 273 m long and the flight deck is approx 2/3 the ship length = 180 (about)

therefore the ship needs to move at approx

(180*1.25-1)/20 = 11.2m/s = 21.77kts

apparently the ship can do 30 odd kts so based on that garbage above yes.   :)

However...

That takeoff run will take up the entire flight deck with no margin.
Acceleration will not be linear, it will reduce with airspeed.
The data was for a stock Defender and I imagine that it was at a fairly light weight. I would imagine that the extra weight of the radar will increase the stall speed and the drag from the radome will reduce the acceleration...

In conclusion, your guess is as good as mine  ???

Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 05, 2013, 07:23:55 AM
Yeah, thus I figured that I might need a Trilander frame.

Looks like that opinion has just been reinforced......
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Caveman on March 05, 2013, 07:46:26 AM
Not sure that the trislander is actually better in that respect

takeoff distance 411m

http://www.buyplanesforsale.com/aircraft/britten-norman/bn-2a-iii-trislander/510/ (http://www.buyplanesforsale.com/aircraft/britten-norman/bn-2a-iii-trislander/510/)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on March 26, 2013, 07:28:03 AM
I'm brainstorming on a fictional ship with aviation facility comparable to that of the upcoming Indian carrier.  I am wondering, though, if I'd be stuck with helo-based AEW platforms, or if there is actually some fixed-wing STOL transport type that has potential as a basis......


What about the Yakolev MADCAP? It actually flew, is a STOL aircraft and is an AEW aircraft.

(http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/an-71-2-prev.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 26, 2013, 11:17:04 AM
What about the Antonov MADCAP? It actually flew, is a STOL aircraft and is an AEW aircraft.


Perhaps.  I find the turbojet booster concept interesting, too.

The brainstorming ended up leading to this (http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/dy031101/Parallel%20World%20and%20What-if/PU-CGV-PingYuenClass-2-AU.png).
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on March 26, 2013, 11:45:19 AM
Yeah, thus I figured that I might need a Trilander frame.

Looks like that opinion has just been reinforced......
Mayhaps a Trilander with the piston engines replaced by suitable small turboprops?  Perhaps something from the high-power end of the Allison (now RR) 250 family of engines?  Three of those would definitely give more power without a large, if any, increase in weight.  As I remember, an Allison 250 weighs what a Lycoming IO320 does and produces twice the horsepower.  The one aircraft Great Lakes re-engined that way was a real screamer; not much faster (hard to push a biplane that much faster) but really able to zoom climb and do spectacular takeoffs and maneuvers.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on March 26, 2013, 03:45:29 PM
For a whiff story I’m scoping I’ve introduced an external player (an alternate Australia) who have a mutual security agreement with Portugal into the 1961 Indian-Portuguese Goa War. While the Indian Army still overruns Goa the RAN’s fleet carrier (Victorious class) operating in the Arabian Sea promptly sinks most of the Indian Navy. Including their then brand new (to them) aircraft carrier INS Vikrant.

This of course really upsets India and they turn to the Soviet Union to build a replacement (and other things). According to Gollevainen from Shipbucket the most recent Soviet carrier design at that time was the Project 85.

Quote
Soviet carrier plans did not resume until Stalin’s death in 1953. Two pre-project designs where made in 1954. One by TsKB-17 and other by the navy’s internal design studies organisation TSNII-45. Each of these designs carried 40 aircrafts. TsKB-17 version would have displaced 30,555t, with speed of 34 knots. It was provably called project 85 which bears strong similarity to US Essex class (after SCB-27C) and French Foch class. TsNII-45 suggested 21,000t with speed of 32, 5 knots. These plans came their end in 1955 when Soviets new premier Khrushcev who fired Kuznetsov, officially because the disastrous sinking of the battleship Novorossiysk but more likely because Kuznetsov was strong supporter of large surface oriented fleet. Khrushcev had other plans.


(http://img473.imageshack.us/img473/852/pr859qh5ij.jpg)

So they brush of this design and build it for India to replace the Vikrant.

I am at a bit of quandary as to what air wing it would have? And hope anyone here can help. Could some of the Soviet fighters of the early 1960s be converted to carrier operation? There is the Yak 36 but the Indian Navy at the time has conventional carrier aircraft. They would still have some of their Hawker Sea Hawks (and more were brought from West Germany) and their Breguet Alize force for an air wing. But no doubt would want more modern types from the Soviet Union to go with their new carrier.

If anyone has any ideas they would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 26, 2013, 05:44:03 PM
Victorious class?  As in the modernised HMS Victorious?  Interesting, how about Implacable and Indefatigable, there were offered to the RAN during WWII weren't they?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on March 26, 2013, 06:23:22 PM
I don’t want to give too much away as I’m already behind one whiff world on this forum (which is nearing completion as I’ve abandoned any artwork and just concentrated on the words) which is our Opportunity Cost. In this scenario I have the Alternate Australia being incorporated as an independent nation earlier and with far greater domestic military capability in the 19th century. So by WWI the RAN has a fleet of two King Edward VI pre dreadnaught battleships, two Invincible class battlecruisers and two Neptune class battleships. The war survivors of this fleet had to be given up as part of the Washington Naval Treaty. But this RAN had very good reason to require a local based capital ship force so is sub allocated two battleships and a carrier from the British Empire allotment. During WWII they take delivery of the two ‘Implacable’ class carriers which had always been built for RAN use (and therefore were never called Implacable and Indefatigable). Since they had a pre-existing fleet carrier it was part of the war time expansion of the RAN. Post war they were kept in service and rebuilt in the 1950s along the lines of HMS Victorious and flying air wings of Grumman Tigers, Trackers and Tracers with the ASW planes frequently replaced by Marine Corps Boeing F8Bs. Hence the name Victorious class because I don’t want to tell you their RAN name at the moment.

But I’m still at a huge loss to imagine a Soviet supplied 1960s carrier air wing. Indian Naval Aviation would only lose eight Sea Hawks and six Alizes with the sinking of INS Vikrant. They brought plenty more Sea Hawks during the early 60s from the RN and German Marineflieger (74 all up by 1966) and a second batch of Alizes in 67 (lots of attrition flying jets from light fleet carriers). But really with the move to Soviet technology they should have a Soviet air wing. None of the regular Soviet aircraft of the time (Su-7, Mig-21, etc) are remotely carrier suitable. I might have to get out my copies of Soviet Secret Projects but they are inside a box inside a pile of boxes.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on March 26, 2013, 07:49:23 PM
Well I didn't get out the Soviet Secret Projects book but I did have a look at my Warbird Tech MiG-21 book and there was the answer on page 55. The MiG Ye-8:

(http://prototypes.free.fr/ye8/images/ye8_02.jpg)

Which was developed as a SARH missile firing interceptor for the Soviet requirement that resulted in the MiG-23. But it had a new engine that blew up and ruined the project. But was flying in 62 and a possible basis for a rapid project to field a naval fighter for the Indians. With the older R11 engine it wouldn't be as fast and high flying as the MiG-23 but it would still be highly responsive compared to all other Soviet fighters of the time. The canards could be powered to help control attitude for landing and it had blown flaps which could be extended to a full blown wing, slats, etc. The big radar installation means it can have a useful sea search mode and cockpit view is astounding by Mig-21 and MiG-23 standards.

Now need to find a maritime support aircraft platform. Unless anyone has any better ideas for a fighter? Before the Ye-8 page was turned I was thinking of a MiG-21 with a new high wing with variable incidence like the Vought Crusader. Plus there is of course the Yak-36. Any ideas would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 26, 2013, 08:30:08 PM
I don’t want to give too much away as I’m already behind one whiff world on this forum (which is nearing completion as I’ve abandoned any artwork and just concentrated on the words) which is our Opportunity Cost. In this scenario I have the Alternate Australia being incorporated as an independent nation earlier and with far greater domestic military capability in the 19th century. So by WWI the RAN has a fleet of two King Edward VI pre dreadnaught battleships, two Invincible class battlecruisers and two Neptune class battleships. The war survivors of this fleet had to be given up as part of the Washington Naval Treaty. But this RAN had very good reason to require a local based capital ship force so is sub allocated two battleships and a carrier from the British Empire allotment. During WWII they take delivery of the two ‘Implacable’ class carriers which had always been built for RAN use (and therefore were never called Implacable and Indefatigable). Since they had a pre-existing fleet carrier it was part of the war time expansion of the RAN. Post war they were kept in service and rebuilt in the 1950s along the lines of HMS Victorious and flying air wings of Grumman Tigers, Trackers and Tracers with the ASW planes frequently replaced by Marine Corps Boeing F8Bs. Hence the name Victorious class because I don’t want to tell you their RAN name at the moment.

But I’m still at a huge loss to imagine a Soviet supplied 1960s carrier air wing. Indian Naval Aviation would only lose eight Sea Hawks and six Alizes with the sinking of INS Vikrant. They brought plenty more Sea Hawks during the early 60s from the RN and German Marineflieger (74 all up by 1966) and a second batch of Alizes in 67 (lots of attrition flying jets from light fleet carriers). But really with the move to Soviet technology they should have a Soviet air wing. None of the regular Soviet aircraft of the time (Su-7, Mig-21, etc) are remotely carrier suitable. I might have to get out my copies of Soviet Secret Projects but they are inside a box inside a pile of boxes.
If I remember my Australian history correctly the colonies were already looking to some form of federation prior to 1850 but this was short circuited by the gold rush(s) or more specifically the chaos, mass relocation of populations and unexpected immigration trigger by said rush(s).
An easy way to circumvent this disruption and derailing of federation would have been to better control the gold reserves and ensure the country got its fair share.  Easier said than done though, perhaps a military intervention.

On the Soviet aircraft, how about an evovled MIG 19 or a YAK-28 derivative?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: AGRA on March 26, 2013, 09:24:30 PM
On the Soviet aircraft, how about an evovled MIG 19 or a YAK-28 derivative?

MiG-19 had excellent take off run so probably could be made carrier compatible but is till old school for 1960s. The Yak-28 is interesting but looks too big for a <30,000 tonne carrier. I'm firming on the Ye-8 as the "MiG-24" and a reboot of the Tu-91. The delivery of the aircraft isn't super rushed by Soviet standards as the ship needs to be built and the Indians still have an air wing. I'm looking at orders in 62 with ship commissioning in 68 and operational air wing with new aircraft by 70.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 27, 2013, 02:51:36 PM
What about a Ye-8 given a Su-17 style VG wing for better carrier performance?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on March 28, 2013, 12:34:02 AM
What about a Ye-8 given a Su-17 style VG wing for better carrier performance?
So, a cross of Ye-8 with a wing that's a mix of Ye-2 and scaled-down Su-17?  That could be interesting indeed.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on April 08, 2013, 12:55:01 PM
I once heard a comment saying that Hermes lost its Type 984 radar because politicians want to play up its role as a "commando carrier" and their aversion to conventional aircraft carriers, and that Type 984, despite its bulk and weight, was actually pretty good and an effective 3D radar.

Which led me to wonder about one thing- what would happen to the sensor suite of Hermes if it stayed a fleet carrier (maybe they decided that logistic commonality of having carriers large and small trumps the handicap of a small airwing on Hermes; or maybe the P.1154 did go on-line)?  Would it have kept the Type 984 throughout its career, or would the radar still have been replaced with something with a modern spec. somewhere down the road?

Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 20, 2013, 06:37:56 AM
Interesting thought:  Brazil buys PA2 Carrier (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/france-steaming-ahead-on-pa2cvf-carrier-project-01621/)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on May 01, 2013, 06:28:24 AM
What about a Ye-8 given a Su-17 style VG wing for better carrier performance?
Or what about a Viggen-type aproach with the navalised Ye-8 - aka even larger canards to improve STOL cabability on a Soviet carrier! After all the weight and complication of the VG-wing arrangement was (and would be) a penalty and complication (even to the later MiG-23 Flogger (and in that case most VG-wing designed aircraft)). Plus I don't know if the Soviet's would have been able to master the steam catapult system for it's early carriers. So a Viggen-type approach would improve STOL, ease complication and maintanance aboard it's carriers!
Just a thought!!

M.A.D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on August 31, 2013, 11:22:45 PM
Resuscitation here.

Ok late WWII the UK was planning their post war fleet which included the dominion contributions.  One of the plans was to replace the traditional colonial cruiser presence with smaller number of infinitely more capable light fleet carriers employing general purpose air groups capable of limited power projection, air and surface defence and ASW.  Sea Fury and Fireflys flying from the Colossus and Majestic CVLs were a start and the later Sea hawk, Sea Venom and Gannet were a suitable follow on with the Short Seamew also available. 

To my knowledge the carriers were never employed in this fashion, however if they were and were evolved and then standardised in NATO as aircraft cruisers CLV, CAV, CBV we could have seen a continuous development of US, UK and other European aircraft cruisers through until the development of the SCS, Invincible, Garibaldi, PA75 etc.

The first ships would have been converted Independence, Saipan, Colossus and Majestic class carriers.  They would have incorporated improved radars, perhaps sonar and command and control facilities.  Their air defence capabilities would have been updated as much as possible perhaps to include Tartar or similar. 

The 1950s would have seen new ships (still around the same size) being built, designed with an area air defence missile system and facilities to operate light fighter attack aircraft in addition to ASW aircraft.

The 1960s there would have been 3D radars, stand off ASW weapons and ASW helos in place of the fixed wing ASW but maybe with the addition of a small number of fixed wing AEW aircraft to support the embarked fighters. 

Now in the fifties the fighters are easy, Sea hawks, Sea Venoms, Panthers, Banshees and may be even Furys with Skyhawks a no brainer to follow, but what to use for the 60s where Mig 21 were being flogged to all and sundry?  How about evolved Gnats and F-5s?  Folland proposed a variety of evolved Gnats including twin engines with after burners and variable geometry wings and the Northrop Fang Fighter, which led to the F-5, started out a a naval fighter.

Thoughts.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 12:00:51 AM
Well the F-8 Crusader's a pretty fair bet. With a few mods to reduce the landing speed, the French managed to operate them from Clemenceau and Foch, and they were only about 35,000 tons.

I don't support the idea of putting much fixed armament, and certainly not space-eaters like big SAMs on carriers. you have a very limited number of decks capable of fixed-wing aviation, so they should be optimised for it to the nth degree. Put SAMs, ASuMs, flag facilities etc... on the escorting cruisers/destroyers that can position themselves to use them better anyway.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 01, 2013, 12:13:55 AM
The original thinking was they would have minimal if any escort, there were to be the spiritual replacement for the station cruiser.  So imagine a destroyer and frigate, also imagine as from after the Suez they would have embarked a RM force including helos.  Imagine 6 ASW helos, up to a dozen fighters a couple of AEW aircraft (maybe) and half a dozen transport helos for a total of between 20 and 30 aircraft.  Basically I am thinking about a class that is not a carrier persay anymore rather a cruiser with aircraft that eventually morphs into a modern Harrier  (then F-35B) carrier.  This ship would in the NATO wotld be an escort to strike carriers and amphibious units rather than be escorted its self.  It would perhaps for the centre of a surface action or escort group.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on September 01, 2013, 12:43:58 AM
Isn't this what the USMC operate ?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on September 01, 2013, 12:48:48 AM
For countering MiG-21's, Northrop's N-285B would be perfect.  It was designed as a trainer/light fighter for the USN to deal with their criticisms of the F-5/T-38 for carrier duty and would serve admirably.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 01:45:26 AM
The original thinking was they would have minimal if any escort, there were to be the spiritual replacement for the station cruiser.  So imagine a destroyer and frigate, also imagine as from after the Suez they would have embarked a RM force including helos.  Imagine 6 ASW helos, up to a dozen fighters a couple of AEW aircraft (maybe) and half a dozen transport helos for a total of between 20 and 30 aircraft.  Basically I am thinking about a class that is not a carrier persay anymore rather a cruiser with aircraft that eventually morphs into a modern Harrier  (then F-35B) carrier.  This ship would in the NATO wotld be an escort to strike carriers and amphibious units rather than be escorted its self.  It would perhaps for the centre of a surface action or escort group.

The thing is, they'd still be a big, valuable ship full of valuable aircraft. The loss of one would be a major blow for any NATO navy except possibly the USA (and they wouldn't take it lightly either). I can't see such a ship going anywhere remotely dangerous without, at least, a AAW escort and an ASW escort. In any case, it won't be staying on station long without a replenishment ship, and who's going to escort that?

Also, having your major defensive weapons on escorts multiplies their effectiveness. If the AAW ship can be pushed out 10 miles up the air-threat axis, then it starts swatting the air raid 10 miles further out and the carrier gets more time to turn away from the attack and open up the range. Likewise, if the carrier can turn away from a submarine contact while the ASW escort prosecutes it, then every minute the sub spends maneuvering against the escort, the safer the carrier is.

Tartar and ASROC were very flexible systems that (in stark contrast to UK systems) showed themselves capable of being re-fitted to, and operated successfully from, all manner of ships. The French, for instance, re-fitted some of their T47 destroyers with Tartar and some with Malafon, while ASROC replaced torpedo tubes on many a wartime destroyer. It's my opinion that the RN's Daring class could and should have been re-fitted with Tartar, and damned useful they'd have been too!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on September 01, 2013, 02:58:39 AM
Anything beyond just making a quick point will involve a flotilla of ships anyway since WWII.

I remember there to be a light weight Sea Dart system utilizing box launchers, too.  Smaller escorts could have at least gone for that although Mk 13 and Mk 22 are probably still a better choice if the said escorts are at least bigger than, say, WWII-vintage Gearing class.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 03:04:44 AM
The problem with Lightweight Sea Dart was that however light the launcher, you still needed a very large target tracking radar to exploit it's range, given the low gain of the missile's interferometer aerial system. You could use a smaller radar, but then you might as well use Tartar/Standard SM-1 and not have to pay for the Sea Dart's ramjet system.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 01, 2013, 06:50:59 AM
Isn't this what the USMC operate ?

Yes, remove the dock and most of the 1700-1800 Marines and their vehicles and you save a considerable amount of size and displacement.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 01, 2013, 07:10:35 AM
I am working off the UK concept of CVLs replacing station / colonial cruisers post war.  They would have a small general purpose air group and minimal escort, therefore the need to carry some of their own defensive weaponry, if the proverbial ever hit the fan they would hang back and leave it too the strike carriers in their carrier battle groups or even form part of the escort for said group.

Basically I am just toying with how this would have worked from the advent of jets through until the arrival of the Sea harrier and AV-8B+.  With the F-35b every LHD and LHA potentially becomes a highly capable CVL.  The concept is flawed but if it had happened it would have generated the need for suitable aircraft that in turn would have made carrier aviation more affordable for medium powers to retain.  With suitable aircraft available, designed to operate off small carriers then there is a greater chance replacements would have been built for the existing war built carriers.

As an aside I believe the Gnat would have fit in the hangers of HMS Implacable and Indefatigable, so a navalised Gnat for the conceptual CLV could also have been the saviour of the Indefatigables.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 08:25:01 AM
Isn't this what the USMC operate ?

Yes, remove the dock and most of the 1700-1800 Marines and their vehicles and you save a considerable amount of size and displacement.

Yes and no: USMC amphibious ships (even the pure LPHs) are/were much slower than a fleet carrier, so they'd generate less wind over deck for fixed-wing ops and wouldn't be fast enough to escort strike carriers. Speed was also a limitation in the Colossus/Majestic class as well. Your multi-role light carrier would need to be a 30 knot "fleet" carrier first and foremost, with a proportion of aviation/accomodation/stores space devoted to trooping operations.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 08:38:47 AM
If we're considering navalised Gnats for these ships, why not navalised Fiat G.91s too?

Although the G.91 is generally considered a strike aircraft, it's actually no less of a "fighter" than a Gnat Mk.1, with high-subsonic performance, an Orpheus engine, guns and no radar. It also has better rough-field capabiltiy than a Gnat, which implies to me (though I havn't got the figures) that it's landing speed is lower.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on September 01, 2013, 09:00:43 AM
Has there ever been a trainable box launcher proposed/trialed for Tartar/Standard missiles?

(Wanting to find out if what I saw at Shipbucket is indeed one of those "never-built" designs......)

========================================================================

The "Through Deck Cruisers" (Invincibles) and the abortive CVA-01 were both designed with their own defensive weaponry, but they add to the firepower of their own properly-armed and -equipped escorts.

========================================================================

Although the G.91 is generally considered a strike aircraft, it's actually no less of a "fighter" than a Gnat Mk.1, with high-subsonic performance, an Orpheus engine, guns and no radar.

Portuguese put Sidewinders on their G.91s and employed the jets as interceptors during the UN arms embargo.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 09:03:20 AM
Has there ever been a trainable box launcher proposed/trialed for Tartar/Standard missiles?

(Wanting to find out if what I saw at Shipbucket is indeed one of those "never-built" designs......)

========================================================================

The "Through Deck Cruisers" (Invincibles) and the abortive CVA-01 were both designed with their own defensive weaponry, but they add to the firepower of their own properly-armed and -equipped escorts.

There was a fixed box launcher for Standard. It's generally described as being for Standard ARM, enabling the latter to be used as an interim AShM pending avialability of Harpoon, but I think I'm right in saying that some users (Taiwan?) have used it for SAM rounds as well.

It's often assumed that the "through-deck cruiser" moniker for the Invincibles was a subterfuge to get carriers back in the RN "through the back door", but this is myth. The Invincible design started out as an escort cruiser for CVA-01 with SAMs, half-a dozen ASW helos and no SHARs. It then became a more carrier-like through-deck design when the helo complement was increased to a dozen. SHARs only came later, after the design had been pretty much fixed, and the Sea Dart was kept because of doubts about the latter's real air-defence capability: it was seen as good for "scaring off the Bears" and little else in the mid 1970s.

Two significant things about the Invincible's Sea Darts are that a) they were eventually removed to make way for more efficient aviation facilities and b) despite having them, an Invincible never went anywhere without an escorting Type 42 destroyer.

The provision of Sea Dart on CVA-01 is generally regarded as one of the design's weak features these days, since it cost a lot of deck and hangar space and set up a potentially very nasty accident if a landing aircraft came in slightly too low. The design originally had Ikara as well, but that was dropped to save space and cost and my bet is that had the CVA-01 continued, Sea Dart would have been dropped in subsequent design iterations also, for similar reasons. It was probably there in the first place as a result of influence from the USA since the three Kitty Hawk class super-carriers were originally built with twin Terrier launchers, but even on these enormous ships the volume cost was considered excessive and they were quickly removed and replaced with Sea Sparrow.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Cliffy B on September 01, 2013, 09:10:08 AM
Has there ever been a trainable box launcher proposed/trialed for Tartar/Standard missiles?

Trainable, not that I know of.  Box launcher yes!  Look at the Taiwanese rebuilt Sumner/Gearing DDs.  They added about 10 Standards in single shot boxes when they modernized them for the 1990's.  Kept those DDs going until the early 2000s  :o
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on September 01, 2013, 09:31:36 AM
There was a fixed box launcher for Standard. It's generally described as being for Standard ARM, enabling the latter to be used as an interim AShM pending avialability of Harpoon, but I think I'm right in saying that some users (Taiwan?) have used it for SAM rounds as well.
Trainable, not that I know of.  Box launcher yes!  Look at the Taiwanese rebuilt Sumner/Gearing DDs.  They added about 10 Standards in single shot boxes when they modernized them for the 1990's.  Kept those DDs going until the early 2000s  :o

Both Taiwan and Iran have used fixed launchers, albeit in different forms.  The ones used by Taiwan (selected Gearings only; Allen Sumners were all rebuilt into general-purpose warships) look like regular anti-ship missile launchers whereas the one used by Iran looks rather similar in terms of operation to the Tomahawk ABL.

I just figured that if a single, sufficiently-sized spot is available on a combatant, a trainable launcher might beat placing fixed launchers throughout the ship?

========================================================================

Even CVA-01 with its Sea Dart launcher was never meant to leave home without a Type 82 DDG by her side.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Cliffy B on September 01, 2013, 09:44:53 AM
Sufficient room for a trainable launcher and sufficient reserve weight are two totally different things.  Fixed launchers are far simpler and light vs trainable versions.  Just saying  :)

That box launcher Weaver is talking about was mounted on some of the Asheville PGs prior to Harpoon which, I'm not even sure they ever received.  They elevated similar to an ABL and fired towards the bow with a 2nd box mounted forward with one reload per launcher.

I did see a concept sketch of a fixed box launcher mount (20 something rounds) for carriers that held Phoenix missiles re-purposed to a SAM role.  Don't think it ever left paper though.

Did the Taiwanese ever modify the ASROC launchers on their FF-1052s to fire Standards?  I want to say I read that somewhere but I can't remember.  I know the USN modified some to fire Harpoons but I think that was all.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on September 01, 2013, 09:59:40 AM
Did the Taiwanese ever modify the ASROC launchers on their FF-1052s to fire Standards?  I want to say I read that somewhere but I can't remember.  I know the USN modified some to fire Harpoons but I think that was all.

The ASROC launchers in ROCN service are also capable of only ASROC and (FF-1052 class) Harppons.  They recycled the box launchers from the upgraded Gearing class to give their Knox class frigates area air defense capability.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 01, 2013, 02:26:16 PM
Quite like the G91, hadn't thought of it to be honest, I was just going on there being carrier versions proposed for the Gnat and F-5 rather than any bias for or against any aircraft in particular.

Thinking on it these ships would be more a replacement for the Pre WWI Armoured Cruisers and Battle Cruisers than the treaty cruisers of between the wars and WWII.  Large powerful ships able project power a long was from home without the need to deploy a battle fleet.  More the centre of a "Fleet Unit" rather than a part of a battle squadron or fleet.   The original Fleet Unit roughly consisted of a single 2nd or 3rd rate capital ship supported by a number of fleet cruisers, a squadron of destroyers, another of submarines and a support ship.  When the capital ship is a carrier the aircraft can replace many of the ships, i.e. an ASW helo station is equivalent to a screening destroyer or frigate, a flight of attack aircraft replaces your destroyer squadron in the anti surface role and for WWII onwards an AEW aircraft station replaces your radar picket cruiser / destroyer.  A fleet unit built around a small fast carrier could be parred back to the carrier, one or two cruisers, one or two destroyers and a couple of frigates.

Agree on the speed requirements, the RN CVLs were too slow and the USN CVLs, while they had the requisite speed, were not really capable as carriers in the post war period.  New ships would be needed, similar in size to the RN 1942 CVLs but built to naval scantlings and faster. 

I am a bit all over the place with this, just churning through ideas but the end result is an evolution of small multi role carriers suitable for secondary deployments with large navies and forming the core of small to medium navies.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 01, 2013, 06:04:05 PM
Effectively, they're 1950s versions of the 1970s Sea Control Ship idea, i.e. a secondary, deck-multiplying asset for the USN but a primary for somewhere like Spain or Italy.

The problem with replacing ships with aircraft, certainly in the 1950s and until very recently, is that the latter are fine as long as they're working, flying, in the right place and still in one piece.

1. Aircraft go unservicable, the more so the longer they keep flying high intensity ops, and even the best carriers have limited abilities to repair them. Warships are relatively more reliable and durable, so the escort's guns, missiles and depth charges will still be working long after most of the aircraft have become hangar queens.

2. Until relatively recently, air ops could be shut down completely by weather conditions, and even if they were flying, their effectiveness was severely reduced by night or bad weather. The AAW escort is still ten miles up-threat, even in the worst weather.

3. Once airborne, aircraft are no longer "tied" to the carrier, and can be decoyed, mislead or chased away. The weapons on the escort ships will always be there because they can't go anywhere else.

4. Aircraft crash and get shot down. It's not unknown for carriers to be forced to withdrawn from combat simply because they don't have a viable force left. Again, on the day after you've reached this point, you still need to defend your force, which you can only do with the escorts because they're all that's left.

All of these factors are much more significant the smaller the carrier is, because each individual aircraft represents a greater percentage of the ships totla air group. For instance, if two USN Hornets collided and crashed in bad weather it'd be tragic, but it would only reduce the super-carrier's offensive/defensive air power by just over 4% (assuming she has 48 x Hornets). By contrast, when two of HMS Hermes' SHARs collided and crashed in bad weather during the Falklands war, it reduced the carrier's air power by nearly 17% purely because she only had 12 to begin with.

You idea isn't a bad one, it just needs to recognise the neccessity for escort ships. If you look at small carriers task groups fielded by any nation, they almost inevitably consist of the carrier, two or three escorts, and a supply ship. By the way, the latter is not merely a logistics asset, at least in the RN. The latter's biggest replen ships can operate up the FIVE Merlins, and provide greater maintenance support for them than the frigates, so putting say, a Fort Victoria in a force with Type 23 frigates actually increased the combat effectiveness/persistance of the latter.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 01, 2013, 09:43:48 PM
Its an evolving idea but yes the end result is a more powerful, flexible SCS, evolved from a series of ships starting with war built CVLs and maybe smaller fleet carriers (think armoured fleet carriers).

As Tartar was initially seen as a point defence weapon it would still be a good fit on these ships, as would 3"guns 50 cal to start then 70 cal.  Basically aim to embark a useful number of good enough aircraft rather than too few of the best available.  Gnats, F-5s, G91s, A-4s etc rather than Phantoms and Buccaneers or Intruders, leave the big. complex aircraft for the big carriers.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 02, 2013, 12:58:24 AM
My inclination would be to put a Seacat and a director on each aft sponson and a British 3" 70-cal Mk.6 on each forward one, with a single director above the bridge (two if you can find room). Think of a Clemenceau layout, but with the front sponsons shorter and the aft ones narrower. The guns should have enough room to rotate 180 deg to present their backs to a heavy sea, possibly aided by a retractable spray shield on the front of the sponsons.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on September 03, 2013, 09:18:40 AM
The recent discussion reminds me of this (http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1116&sid=34b6896cf83061ce2da28da9933d1c12&start=10#p37869).

A lot of items need to be "back-dated", but I suppose the idea is similar.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 03, 2013, 09:21:51 PM
Jumping forward in time I actually quite like the VT Harrier Carrier concept of 1976.  6000ton hull based on the Type 21 frigate with GT generators and electric propulsion, designed to embark 8 Harriers and 2 helos (Seakings) in the hanger so assume 12 and 4 respectively with deck park.  Insert one of them into your escort group with an air defence DDG or DLG, an ASW FFG or two and a fast tanker with large hanger helo deep maintenance facilities and you would be cooking with gas.

You Could easily go bigger, say 8000 or 10000 tons to provide extra speed and aircraft capacity say base it on a DLG instead of a FF. 

Back in the late 80s I did a stack of sketches (all gone now) of small carriers based roughly on the VT Harrier Carrier and Garibaldi, ranging from 150 to 200m in length.  They had Fore and Aft, Port and STBD sponsons each with a medium calibre gun (3" to 5") and a CIWS (usually Goalkeeper) occasionally Seawolf as well.  Mk 26 / Sea Dart or Mk 41 (or VLS Seawolf) installed fore and aft the island superstructure as per Garibaldi and directors and radars surmounting the bridge.

I even developed a back story which, if I remember correctly, when something along the lines of :
Post Falklands the UK realised that more, not fewer, carriers were required.  This led not only to the retention of HMS Invincible but the design of the DLG(V), an evolved VT Harrier Carrier of 8000tons and 180m.  It was design specifically to embark a Squadron of Sea Harrier FRS 2s and a Sea King AEW flight and to serve in a command and control role for destroyers and frigates.  The general idea was each lead a group consisting of a Batch 3 Type 42 a Batch III Type 22 and a pair of Type 23s.

That was the general jist of it, not too deep I know but I was in my teens back then.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: jcf on October 26, 2013, 05:18:48 AM
SARO/Westlands design from 1960.

(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww291/joncarrfarrelly/1500_TON_ACV_CVN_01.png)

... look like Scimitars on deck and in the hangar.

source: From River To Sea: The Marine Heritage of Sam Saunders
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on October 26, 2013, 05:23:22 AM
Wow!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on December 07, 2013, 04:39:44 AM
Does anyone know if there is a kit of the aircraft carrier Príncipe de Asturias (see below) available?

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/SNS_Principe_de_Asturias_%28R11%29_during_Dragon_Hammer_92.jpg/800px-SNS_Principe_de_Asturias_%28R11%29_during_Dragon_Hammer_92.jpg)

This rumour (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.passarodeferro.com%2F2013%2F12%2Fangola-compra-porta-avioes-principe-das.html) has me thinking...
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on December 07, 2013, 04:50:48 AM
Well, there was a bit a while back about S. Korea wanting aircraft carriers, I could see them wanting to buy her, too.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 26, 2014, 04:55:37 AM
Some nice photos of INS Vikramaditya:

(http://lh4.ggpht.com/-8xlLtnfkUGo/UQn4Zppkm_I/AAAAAAAAIVI/199jQjMRC7s/s0/Aircraft-Carrier-INS-Vikramaditya-Indian-Navy-01.jpg)
(http://lh6.ggpht.com/-KMqvTkRfAP4/UQn4bDMEYNI/AAAAAAAAIVQ/BZtoEixDRwA/s0/Aircraft-Carrier-INS-Vikramaditya-Indian-Navy-02.jpg)
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/-UzPnQf9SdAI/UQn4cWR80ZI/AAAAAAAAIVY/Tlby648qQhQ/s0/Aircraft-Carrier-INS-Vikramaditya-Indian-Navy-03.jpg)
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/-lISiMN-xNi4/UQn4YJq38ZI/AAAAAAAAIVA/fjFpeQm0dtQ/s0/Aircraft-Carrier-INS-Vikramaditya-Indian-Navy-05.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 12, 2014, 02:47:27 AM
Random idea:  Taiwan gets an aircraft carrier - say something in the class of a Harrier carrier or Canberra class?  could certainly have interesting implications re mainland China...
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 13, 2014, 06:23:36 AM
After multiple instances of recollecting past discussion I had elsewhere only to have to weed out badly-worded (on my part) terms, this is the final version of my initial response to GTX's idea......

Random idea:  Taiwan gets an aircraft carrier - say something in the class of a Harrier carrier or Canberra class?

Europe would have been the only likely source of assistance in that regard, and it'd have to start early, when domestic political opposition was relatively powerless.

Maybe an ex-RN commando carrier to start with?

Expect the ROCN to arm that commando carrier to the teeth against corvettes and below, based on their experience holding the line against the PLAN in the '50s and becoming a trend that would likely continue for its sister and/or successor vessel.

In the post-Chiang era it would be even less likely that a dedicated aircraft carrier, as in without capability for another role, would look good in the eyes of the Legislative Yuan.  How the successor ship is going to look like would have depended on that other role the ROCN would officially request the carrier for.  They might want something that can contribute to defense of shipping lane vital to Taiwan (a cruiser), they might realize that they (as they do in real-life) desperately need logistics vessels (a supply ship), or they might decide not to outsource troop transportation to and from outlying islands to civilian companies (an assault carrier or even just a RO-RO transport with flight deck and skijump).

could certainly have interesting implications re mainland China...

Could have some implications in South China Sea and Diaoyutai Islands area as well, where it's been every country for themselves in both places.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 13, 2014, 06:35:26 AM
Taiwan buys HMS Illustrious, Principe de Asturias, or one of the laid up Tarawas?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 13, 2014, 06:56:29 AM
Actually another thought comes to mind.  Realising that the opening salvo in any war with the mainland would result in the destruction of all their military airbases Taiwan takes the decision to base the majority of their airpower and a substantial part of their high end offensive land forces off shore in carrier battle groups, amphibious groups and sea bases, supplemented by as many high end SSGs as they can lay their hands on.  What remains on Taiwan is protected by a multi tier defensive missile shield bought from Israel and offensive, retaliatory systems including dozens of land based AGS (155mm gun mounts used on DDG 1000), and thousands of converted ER Standard ARMs to attack PRCs land based radars.  Everything on the islands would be hardened to survive a first strike and retaliate, while the CBGs would launch pin point strikes against targets of opportunity in the PRC.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 13, 2014, 08:23:56 AM
Actually another thought comes to mind.  Realising that the opening salvo in any war with the mainland would result in the destruction of all their military airbases Taiwan takes the decision to base the majority of their airpower and a substantial part of their high end offensive land forces off shore in carrier battle groups, amphibious groups and sea bases, supplemented by as many high end SSGs as they can lay their hands on.  What remains on Taiwan is protected by a multi tier defensive missile shield bought from Israel and offensive, retaliatory systems including dozens of land based AGS (155mm gun mounts used on DDG 1000), and thousands of converted ER Standard ARMs to attack PRCs land based radars.  Everything on the islands would be hardened to survive a first strike and retaliate, while the CBGs would launch pin point strikes against targets of opportunity in the PRC.

The carriers would perhaps be more like aircraft-carrying missile cruisers, with indigenous cruise missiles (of both land attack and anti-ship varieties) being the primary offensive means of the battle groups; the Harriers are allocated to fleet air defense duties.

One question would be a successor carrier fighter to the Harriers.  The US might still not have been thrilled at the idea of selling the F-35B or assisting the ROCN in transitioning to STOBAR unless some evidence is there suggesting that if they don't make that money, someone else will.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 13, 2014, 09:20:30 AM
Or China becomes more belligerent and the US, South Korea and Japan see a strong Taiwan as being in their interests.  F-35B and or C here we come.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 13, 2014, 11:26:21 AM
I was wondering if there could be any advantage to be taken of the Soviet Union's dissolution before Russia hooked up with the PRC again; as in Taiwanese descendant of Yak-41 v.s. J-11 sort of thing......  ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 13, 2014, 11:54:45 AM
Depends were you set the start date for the plan, if it was in the mid 80s then there is nothing stopping Taiwan from snapping up ex soviet goodies over the next decade.  Freestyles would be interesting and that could make Taiwan a possible customer for Invincible and Ark Royal when they became available later.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 13, 2014, 11:58:10 AM
Actually on a completely different tack does anyone have any information on the modified LHA design / concept offered to the RAN as a replacement HMAS Melbourne during the 70s?  How different was it to a Tarawa or Wasp, i.e. did it still have a well dock and vehicle stowage or was it a pure carrier that just used the same hull form and similar systems?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 14, 2014, 10:09:52 AM
For countering MiG-21's, Northrop's N-285B would be perfect.  It was designed as a trainer/light fighter for the USN to deal with their criticisms of the F-5/T-38 for carrier duty and would serve admirably.

Just reading back over the thread and saw this post again which has given me an idea.   

When CVA01 was cancelled and the RN started evaluating their existing carriers for Phantomisation.  It  rapidly became clear that two of the RNs three most recently modernised carriers, Hermes and Victorious were too small for Phantom and were already marginal for Buccaneer, leaving only Eagle and Ark Royal. 

One study I have read about had recommended that Hermes would be a far more capable proposition with a homogenous air-group of three squadrons of A-4 Skyhawks than she would ever be with Phantom, or Sea Vixen and Buccaneer.  This got me thinking along the lines of not only the A-4 but the Etendard, Super Etendard, Jaguar, even a navalised Mirage F1 for both Hermes and Victorious.  That the Phantoms and Buccaneers could be transferred to the RAF and Eagle could simply operate the same aircraft as the smaller carriers and Ark could be retired.

Then on re-reading this it occurred to me, imagine if the RN was looking at the N-285B as a trainer to support the new Phantoms to be operated from CVA01 and upon the cancelation of the new carrier the RN engaged Northrop to develop / co-develop the N-285B as a more capable fighter attack aircraft to serve on the RNs existing modernised carriers through the 1970s and possibly into the 80s?

This would remove the need for the Invincibles and perhaps see the RN operating surplus USN Trackers and Tracers in-addition to the Northrop fighters, re-tasking their carriers as CVS.  Possibly, just possibly the RN could then justify a new class of CTOL CVS in the mid 80s while Northrop develops an improved F-404 powered version of the N-285B. ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 14, 2014, 11:22:41 AM
I've thought about it just a little bit more......

Actually another thought comes to mind.  Realising that the opening salvo in any war with the mainland would result in the destruction of all their military airbases Taiwan takes the decision to base the majority of their airpower and a substantial part of their high end offensive land forces off shore in carrier battle groups, amphibious groups and sea bases, supplemented by as many high end SSGs as they can lay their hands on.  What remains on Taiwan is protected by a multi tier defensive missile shield bought from Israel and offensive, retaliatory systems including dozens of land based AGS (155mm gun mounts used on DDG 1000), and thousands of converted ER Standard ARMs to attack PRCs land based radars.  Everything on the islands would be hardened to survive a first strike and retaliate, while the CBGs would launch pin point strikes against targets of opportunity in the PRC.
One question would be a successor carrier fighter to the Harriers.  The US might still not have been thrilled at the idea of selling the F-35B or assisting the ROCN in transitioning to STOBAR unless some evidence is there suggesting that if they don't make that money, someone else will.

PRC's ability to threaten Taiwan (or anything else beyond its own shores, for that matter) without the use of nuclear weapons did not become anywhere near significant until the beginning of the 2000s.  Granted, other items that could work in your scenario would fall into places around that point as well.

Assuming ROCN did acquire an ex-RN commando carrier with Sea Harriers (like I said, it'd have to start early), would such a change of defense strategy have meant expansion of Sea Harrier fleet or outright replacement with Harrier II?  Maybe the ROC and the UK could have jointly funded the Harrier II + Blue Vixen combo.

As for the aviation cruisers themselves, expect the ROCN to pick the cheapest Harrier carrier template for the job and then try to cram as many weapons on it as possible.  I was initially thinking a Sea Control Ship a.k.a. Principe de Asturias derivative...... how much more heavily-armed could this template be though......
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 15, 2014, 01:56:57 AM
The thought continued......

By early 2000s, the ROC would have access to SM-2MR, tactical-length Mk.41 VLS, and maybe 5" Mk.45 gun...... VL ASROC should be available if requested as well.

I've always been under the impression that an adequate fleet defense airwing has to be at least between nine to 12 fighters.  Existing CVS and CVL designs can do that, but their expansion potential into the role of a cruise missile carrier would be fairly limited.

A configuration similar to former-Soviet Kiev class or American Strike Cruiser Mk.II would be IMHO more easily-adaptable.  Important, since there is hardly any other major surface combatant class- modified O.H. Perry, modified La Fayette, Knox, or even the abortive 1980s PFG-1 project- that can split the cruise missile load of the battle group.

The PFG-1 project would IMHO have played an instrumental role in even making the idea of such a missile cruiser possible- a warship meant to be more versatile than the O.H. Perry on a 3200-ton displacement would be a development that's both difficult and expensive, and there would have been no O.H. Perry or La Fayette (since they are the replacement for the PFG-1 project) in ROCN service as well, but it would have opened up the ROCN's mindset to the idea of a blue-water navy.  It would also have meant that more ships within the battle group could contribute to the group's collective protection.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 24, 2014, 11:01:27 PM
Could the Tarawa Class LHA have been adapted with a steam catapult, arrester gear and a CVA01 style parallel deck to have become a viable replacement for the USNs Modernised Essex class CVS ASW Carriers from the late 70s early 80s?  Designed specifically to embark Viking, Hawkeye and F/A-18A? (probably a stretch for a 250m hull) it would have entered service initially with Trackers, Tracers and Skyhawks.  It would have had a full length hanger in place of the LHAs smaller one and troop accommodation and much of the vehicle deck could be used instead for magazines, spares and fuel.

The dock could be deleted or retained, maybe used for rapid replenishment using modified LCUs to move palletised ordinance and stores.  The ships could retain a secondary LHA or LPH role.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 25, 2014, 02:01:35 AM
I am sure they could have been...provided someone was prepared to wear the cost.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 25, 2014, 06:35:37 AM
Part of my thinking was that by being able to retain the existing air groups and then to move to a common fleet there would be cost savings but whether these would be enough to offset the cost of designing and building a new platform is the question.

For instance Australia buying one off the shelf and retaining Melbourne's air group may have been cheaper than buying a STOVL carrier and Harriers.  Just come down to whether it was economical for the US to design the new CVL/S in the first place.  If they were looking at replacing two ships each for Australia, Canada and the Netherlands the sums may have worked out better.

The standard LHA and a Modified LHA were offered as possible replacements for Melbourne.  I don't have any details on the modified design other then displacement was up from 39900tons to 53800tons, draft was increased from 7.9 to 9.9m and air group from 30 helicopters and Harriers to 50, speed reduced by a knot to 24kt and bean down from 38.4 to 32.2m which sounds like the deletion of a deck edge lift to me.  I imagine the mod was increased hanger size at the expense of troop and vehicle accommodation, increased aviation fuel bunkerge, stores and magazines for ordinance.  No idea what so ever about whether the dock was deleted or retained. 

With the LHA Mod as your starting point you have all the assumed aviation mods plus a steam propulsion plant so the additional costs would be related to the design out fit of the CTOL deck layout, Cats Traps, flight deck and island structure.  With the US experience with their Essex upgrades I imagine designing the CTOL mods wouldn't be too much of a challenge.  Like you said it would come down to cost and part of that cost is the idle Trackers and Skyhawks.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 26, 2014, 09:51:06 AM
Looking through photos online I notice that many of the USNs CVS were the straight deck configuration operating Trackers and helicopters.  I haven't noticed any fighters on any of them though except one with Banshees and Cougars in the late 50s. 

Making some assumptions here,
- the H8 cats and arrester gear were unsuitable for Skyhawks, Furies, Crusaders etc. but fine for Trackers;
- the Trackers usually operated at low tempo so launch and recoveries were less frequent and frantic on a CVS;
- Fighters would have been too difficult to integrate into flight operations along with the Helos and Trackers.

I am wondering if steam cats and appropriate arrester gear were fitted whether a fighter squadron or detachment could have been worked in without too much difficulty.  push the fight deck as far out to starboard as possible, offsetting the arrester gear as well with the deck park on the port, fore and aft the island permitting limited simultaneous launch and landing ops using the port cat only.  Possibly move the helos off onto a supporting platform. 

Same principle applied to a modified Tarawa with a single port cat and offset parallel arrester gear.  Operates a squadron of Trackers then Vikings and a squadron of F-8 then F/A-18 and a detachment of Hawkeyes, Helos are carried by an escorting DDH based on the Spruance Hull.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 31, 2014, 01:56:58 AM
Interesting little diagram I just came across:  2014 Carrier Decks of the World

(http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/7c/85/70/7c8570e56733459406b063c03809eec5.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 31, 2014, 03:58:53 AM
Thanks Greg, the comparison of America to Cavour is interesting.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 04, 2014, 12:07:08 AM
Invincible Class carriers recast as Strike Cruisers as counter for Kirov Class battle cruisers as RN has no battleships to reactivate.

Possible back story, because of Falklands experience RN realises that Hermes is a far more satisfactory and capable design than the Invincibles and designs, builds, commissions three new 30000ton carriers in the late 80s.  This leaves the Invincibles surplus to requirements as aircraft carriers but still very useful hulls otherwise.  Initially as the new carriers are commissioned the Invincibles are employed with minimal changes as Commando Carriers but then with the decision to acquire cruise missiles from the US they are refitted as strike cruisers while retaining their commando carrier role.  With the new generation of quiet soviet submarines appearing in the late 80s it is decided to also retain the ASW helo role as well.

At about this time the RAN seeing the need for a capable escort for their new Tarawa CVS decides to adapt the Invincible Class Strike Cruiser into a multi role Command Cruiser to support the new carriers.  The Australian ships differ from the UK ones in having many US systems installed, including changing from Olympus to LM2500 GTs, Mk26 GMLS, NATO Sea Sparrow, etc. The RAN ships are also designed for reduced crewing to save costs and have no facilities for Harriers and the ADF doesn't have any STOVL aircraft.  Although there are only two new CVS the RAN builds three Strike Cruisers intended to act as task force flagships.
 
Extra guns, missiles, no ski jump helos only or harriers only a secondary not primary consideration.

Tomahawk, Ikara(?) Harpoon, Seadart and Seawolf, or Standard and NATO Sea Sparrow. 

Mk45 5" or Mk8 4.5" in the bow, Oto Melara Super Rapido, Phalanx or Goalkeeper layered to provide 3600 coverage

ASW Helo Sqn, AEW Helo flight, Marine assault helo Sqn, Attack Helo Flight, plus a re enforced company of marines, maybe a detachment of 6 Harriers if space permits but not a priority.

Armament will depend on whether RN or RAN
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 10, 2014, 02:59:26 AM
Interesting proposition for a dedicated UAV Mothership (click on image to download pdf of the proposal):

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/A9RuFlfZX_zps39366212.jpg) (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518429.pdf)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 10, 2014, 06:14:20 PM
Australia's first new LHD of the Canberra class:

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg1_zpsc7b49bef.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg5_zpsf6d5bb0d.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg3_zps022db7f3.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg6_zpsead37cac.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg8_zps385cecaf.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg2_zpsd5a94b56.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg4_zps12e0766a.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg7_zps2a6fd2df.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg9_zps2fcdc3ba.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/imagejpg10_zpsa58970e1.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 10, 2014, 08:27:22 PM
what aircraft will operate from it Greg ?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 11, 2014, 02:10:24 AM
ARH Tiger

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/Royal_Australian_Army_Eurocopter_EC-665_Tiger_ARH_Vabre.jpg/800px-Royal_Australian_Army_Eurocopter_EC-665_Tiger_ARH_Vabre.jpg)

MRH-90 Taipan

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/Royal_Australian_Navy_NHI_MRH-90_Gilbert.jpg/800px-Royal_Australian_Navy_NHI_MRH-90_Gilbert.jpg)

CH-47

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Australian_Army_Boeing_CH-47D_Chinook_CBR_Gilbert.jpg/640px-Australian_Army_Boeing_CH-47D_Chinook_CBR_Gilbert.jpg)

Maybe F-35B

(http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/lockheed/us/products/f35/f-35b-stovl-variant/_jcr_content/center_content/image.img.jpg/1389380939889.jpg)

Maybe USMC AV-8B

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/BAE-McDonell-Douglas_AV8B_edit5.jpg)

The second of the class, to be HMAS Adelaide, is in construction too.

(http://www.navalassoc.org.au/LAUNCHING%20OF%20LHD%20HMAS%20ADELAIDE_4JULY2012.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Diamondback on April 11, 2014, 03:01:51 AM
Still waiting for a SHIELD Helicarrier to show up in this thread... LOL :P
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 11, 2014, 06:18:23 AM
Harriers ? F-35B ?  I wasn't aware that Australia were lining up those ---  But the ski ramp had to be for something didn't it ?

So is the hanger lift right at the back there ?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on April 11, 2014, 07:18:54 AM

Ramp should work for Hellcats, Bearcats, Corsairs, others.   But then needs arresting gear.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 11, 2014, 08:12:48 AM
Harriers ? F-35B ?  I wasn't aware that Australia were lining up those ---  But the ski ramp had to be for something didn't it ?

So is the hanger lift right at the back there ?


Here  (http://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/lhd) are some detailed specs on the ship, its role and its capabilities:  There are two aircraft elevators – one aft of the flight deck and one fwd of the island on the stbd side - that can accommodate medium sized helicopters, with the after one able to accommodate larger helicopters such as CH 47. Both aircraft elevators service the hangar and light vehicle/cargo deck and the fwd elevator is dual roled for stores and personnel.


Australia is not looking at Harriers, as mentioned there is the possiblity of USMC Harriers using the ship though...maybe.  As for the F-35B...well, nothing at this stage but maybe as I said. ;)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 11, 2014, 09:23:25 AM
Unfortunately the Australian government made a deliberate decision not to operate STOVL aircraft from the LHDs, ever.  Accordingly, I believe, internal arrangements, fuel, ordinance stowage etc. are completely inadequate to operate fixed wing aircraft.  JCI the Spanish original on the otherhand is specifically designed to operate AV-8B+.

But for the cost Australia would have deleted the ski-jump as well.

No Australian government has appeared keen on carriers since the 1950s, in fact it came out in cabinet papers recently that, although the incoming Hawke Labor Government cancelled the carrier replacement project in 1982 / 83 that the preceding Frazer Liberal Government which had deferred the project prior to the election was intending to cancel it if they had been re-elected.  Basically Australian politicians saw carriers as too expensive and unnecessary.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 11, 2014, 08:43:59 PM
Was doing some reading on it, what's the difference then between the Australian ones to the Spanish ones.  I see the Spanish will be using fixed wing aircraft on theirs.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 12, 2014, 03:48:45 AM
Was doing some reading on it, what's the difference then between the Australian ones to the Spanish ones.  I see the Spanish will be using fixed wing aircraft on theirs.

I believe internal arrangements such as bunkerage for aviation fuel and ordinance with the RAN ships also having very extensive command control and communications set ups.  The Spanish ship is also fitted with to ability to refuel other ships at sea the RAN ones are not.  Different roles and different internal configurations accordingly.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: mrvr6 on April 12, 2014, 04:10:58 AM
why would australia need aircraft carriers? its not like theyr an island or anything
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 12, 2014, 05:45:02 AM
So why is the Australian Government so skittish about calling an aircraft carrier - an aircraft carrier ?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 12, 2014, 05:46:49 AM
why would australia need aircraft carriers? its not like theyr an island or anything

Well I would say a recent world event would explain that, imagine if they had the carrier out west of Australia right now --- you know, a little northwest of Perth ---
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 12, 2014, 05:54:22 AM
So why is the Australian Government so skittish about calling an aircraft carrier - an aircraft carrier ?


Politics…not much different from the way the iInvincible class were "through-deck" cruisers or the Izumo class (which is about the same size as the Canberra class) and Hyūga class are both Helicopter Destroyers... ::)

Technically the Canberra Class are a LHD - Landing Helicopter Dock with a significant amphibious capability:

(http://www.navy.gov.au/sites/default/files/SHIP_LHD_Canberra_Class_Concept_Cutaway.jpg)

BTW, here is the competing design:

(https://resboiu.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/ship_mistral_class_cutaway_francais_lg.gif)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 12, 2014, 05:59:20 AM
They are neat, reminds me of a scaled-up HMS Intrepid/Fearless from way back (60's-70's)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 12, 2014, 09:22:35 AM
They are neat, reminds me of a scaled-up HMS Intrepid/Fearless from way back (60's-70's)

Or a shrunken Tarawa / Wasp.  We get ARGs docking at my end of the world a couple of times a year, a Wasp and a Harpers Ferry / Whidbey Island , yet to see a San Antonio or the escorting CG / DDGs yet.

I am of the belief that we do need carriers in the RAN but as or government can't yet make the mental leap that you need more than 6 submarines total if you want more than 3 available for deployment it and many other critical capability choices are not going to happen.  I mean we are using aluminium hulled inshore patrol boats as ocean going OPVs and wondering why they are breaking!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 13, 2014, 02:50:40 AM
I am of the belief that we do need carriers in the RAN but as or government can't yet make the mental leap that you need more than 6 submarines total if you want more than 3 available for deployment

The RAN (indeed the ADF) is only so large (RAN ~14000, ADF ~57000) so unless crewing numbers for such platforms drastically reduce it is pointless calling for more.  As it is though, having two modern LHDs, 12 subs in the future (though I wonder how they will crew them given we have historically had a lot of trouble crewing the 6 Collins class) + multiple other new platforms isn't too bad an effort.  I think you will find that even if there was a Govt wanting to go out and acquire a major fixed wing CV capability, they would find the Defence Force chiefs advising against it and also would struggle with the before mentioned crewing issue.

BTW, whilst the Canberra class LHDs might not be as sexy as a conventional CV, I believe you will find that they are far more useful for the type of operations the ADF is expected to get involved with in the future.  They are designed to allow for a fully integrated Navy/Army task force (essentially an Australian 'Marines' capability if you like), have excellent C3 capability, have an extensive medical facilities and the ability to support collation style operations.  Consider the following three types of ops that the ships are considered for:


I would not therefore write them off just because they don't appear like traditional aircraft carriers.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 14, 2014, 10:20:30 AM
I am not writing them off and I do agree with what you have written.  The issue is more one of failing to maintain what we had as it is always far more difficult to rebuild or build from scratch than it is to maintain or enhance something that still exists.  Crewing requirements for the RANs fleet have dramatically reduced of the decades with a destroyers crew 333 dropping to 200 odd a frigate from 250 to 163-180, submarines from67 to 45 (back up to 55 for trainees now), carrier 1300 to zero, and a reduction in hull numbers as well.  Add it all up and we have between a half and a third the sea going berths we had 20 or 30 years ago. 

The issue in part is lack of trained crews which is due also in part to the lack of sea going platforms.  The ships we have are needed at sea because there are not enough of them, this leaves insufficient scope to train and work up crews which means over time there are insufficient crews to send the ships we do have where they need to go.  A classic downward spiral, I saw it on subs, then majors, now on PBs.

A new fixed wing FAA for the RAN is probably unobtainable as the original was only possible due too a large number of trained commonwealth personnel being available following WWII and the perceived need for the capability.

On the other hand had the FAA been maintained or expanded following the experiences of Korea things could have been very different, i.e. two carrier groups and maintenance of the existing force of escorts rather than the cuts that occurred instead.  Multiple opportunities to update, expand or even just maintain the FAA were ignored or rejected through the 50s 60s and 70s before the final decision in the 80s, just as the RN demonstrated the effectiveness and capability of the very platform the RAN was to have acquired.

Now something like japans Hyuga with a crew of around 360 (about that of 2 FFGs) could be achievable and would add far more capability than two new FFGs.  Assuming the government elects to life extend some of the FFGs instead of retiring them when the Hobart class DDGs come on line then a couple of helicopter carriers could be achievable long term.  Cross deck with the USMC and RN, RAAF acquires F-35B....... ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 14, 2014, 08:48:06 PM
I do vaguely remember reading or seeing something very early in the JP2048 selection, that led to the Canberra Class LHDs, mentioning or showing the Cavour as a contender. 

Now that would have been something, it met all the listed requirements outlined in the white paper and if supported by a suitable logistics ship and Landing Craft Heavy (LCH) replacement could have provided far more capability than the actual project has.  Another contender was the San Antonio LPD, it did not meet the requirement for simultaneous helicopter operations but imagine an pair of Cavours supported by or supporting a pair of San Antonios backed up by a number of smaller LPDs or LSDs to replace the LCHs.  Manning wise doable, hull numbers, doable, capability through the roof, good bang for your buck. 

It could be argued that is AV-8B+  / Sea Harrier F/A2 plus AEW is better at air defence than an AWD and that F-35B is better still.  Two Cavour plus 6 modernised FFGs and 8 ASMD ANZACs could have been cheaper and more effective than the 3 AWDs and 2 LHDs. Mmmm.... food for alt RAN thought.....$$$ v man power v available options.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on April 15, 2014, 10:22:18 AM
Funnily enough, I've just been re-reading my book about the Invincibles and wondering what might have happened had the Australian Government actually been keen on maintaining it's carrier force instead of looking for an excuse to get rid of it. There's no way the UK was going to part with Invincible after the Falklands, but what might have been possible was to commission a fourth CVL, with either the RAN taking the fourth one or the RN taking it and then the RAN having Invincible second-hand. In the meantime, the RAN could start taking delivery of Sea Harriers, and either operate them from a re-commissioned Melbourne or a borrowed Hermes until the "new" CVL was available.

I'm sure the RAN wouldn't want to take on Sea Dart for the sake of one ship, and it would probably also be unwise to start mucking about with the CVL design too much, even if the RAN was taking the fourth ship off the drawing board. I'd say that with just one carrier but nine DDG/FFGs in prospect (3 x Perths plus 6 x Adelaides), they'd want minimal weapons and maximum aircraft, so remove/omit Sea Dart and fit two Phalanx on the former Type 909 radar platforms. The front one would probably have to be left the same shape for the gun's radar to clear the bridge on full elevation, but the rear superstructure could probably be shortened to just a slim tower behind the aft funnel with the gun on top of it.

And yes, I have been looking at an Illustrious model, and also thinking how good a SHAR would look in RAN Skyhawk colours... 8)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 15, 2014, 10:50:15 AM
One possibility I was told about was VSEL builds a fourth Invincible for Australia and Australia builds a pair of LSLs for the RFA in a barter deal, each for a hot line as it were.

The other thought that comes to mind is the RAN buys one or two carrier versions of Ocean, i.e. the simpler cheaper diesel powered version of the Invincible but with full SHAR capability rather than the Commando carrier specific outfit.

The ideal in the whiffverse is that the UK realising that the Hermes was a better size ship for the job at hand designs and builds a class of new larger ships and then sells Invincibles to Australia, India and ????? Chile?? Brazil???.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 15, 2014, 04:49:19 PM
Give me a chance to find it but I have a fictional history somewhere based upon Australia having got the Invincible.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 15, 2014, 06:02:24 PM
Give me a chance to find it but I have a fictional history somewhere based upon Australia having got the Invincible.

I'm toying with an idea at the moment of New Zealand acquiring carriers late WWII and maintaining them instead of cruisers through at least the 60s but possibly to modern day depending what they got and when.

My thinking was NZ was in real life a major contributor to the British Pacific Fleet but in this wiffverse the UK acknowledges this through the hot transfer of one or possibly two carriers, maybe escort carriers but preferably Colossus Class CVLs to the RNZN.  NZ retains the ships post war in place of the three Dido class cruisers they received in real life with the ship(s), along with the Corsairs and Avengers going on to serve with distinction in Korea.  Impressed with the utility and flexibility of the carriers NZ decides to retain the capability at two strike carriers through acquisition of more modern and capable vessels (modernised Hermes) during the late 50s early 60s with the RNZN FAA becoming NZ primary air combat force with the RNZAF giving up its fighters and bombers while retaining its MPA and transport assets.  The thinking behind this was basically geography, RNZAF fighters and bombers couldn't actually reach anywhere without a forward base, the RNZNs carriers were a forward base and the RNZN NAS were the home bases for the training and depot squadrons.

In moving to carriers the RNZN moves away from cruisers and embraces destroyers and fast frigates, each carrier having an escort of a destroyer and a pair of frigates.  NZ maintains a very Empire centric slant to its equipment, selecting Daring class destroyers and Type 15 then Type 12 frigates, the exception being unable to afford the new County Class DLGs to escort the new carriers in the 60s NZ instead opts to upgrade their Darings with Tartar.  They replace their Corsairs and Avengers with Seahawks and Gannets which in turn are replaced with Skyhawks, Trackers and Tracers.  Following the Falklands the RNZN opts to replace the Skyhawks with Sea Harrier F/A2 and the Trackers with a mix of Sea Kings (including some AEW 7) and Orions (for the RNZAF).
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 17, 2014, 02:40:50 AM
How about instead of converting Albion and Bulwark into Commando Carriers the RN instead upgrades them and Centaur to the same standard as Hermes?  Either RR Avon Tiger or Super Tiger (J79) selected as replacement for Seahawks and Sea Venoms to serve on Hermes Class CVLs and Victorious.  Buccaneers (or Skywarriors) concentrated on Eagle and Ark Royal.

Convert Unicorn, Implacable, Indefatigable and /or Indomitable into Commando Carriers instead?  Armoured decks (except Unicorn), 4.5" guns (4" Unicorn), double hangers (space for troop decks) too expensive to update for modern aircraft.  Karman Sea Sprite is selected as Commando Assault Helicopter in transport, utility, support and attack versions.

Remaining Colossus Class CVLs are converted into ASW Helicopter Carriers with a pair of Mk11 or 13 GMLS fitted to provide air defence.  Possibly reboilered to increase speed to 27/8kt. ASW group leaders for ASW frigates.

All traditional gun cruisers retired to save manpower and reduce operating costs.  Super Daring with Tartar (Mk13) developed instead of Counties, Mk22 GMLS (16 Tartars instead of 40 in Mk13) armed version of Type 12 developed.  Sea Dart developed but sized to fit Mk13/22/26 GMLS.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 17, 2014, 02:48:57 AM

I'm toying with an idea at the moment of New Zealand acquiring carriers late WWII and maintaining them instead of cruisers through at least the 60s but possibly to modern day depending what they got and when.


Only problem with NZ having carriers is that to crew them you would almost empty the islands... ;)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 17, 2014, 02:53:04 AM

I'm toying with an idea at the moment of New Zealand acquiring carriers late WWII and maintaining them instead of cruisers through at least the 60s but possibly to modern day depending what they got and when.


Only problem with NZ having carriers is that to crew them you would almost empty the islands... ;)

Start with repatriating them from Bondi  ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on April 18, 2014, 04:27:28 AM
the exception being unable to afford the new County Class DLGs to escort the new carriers in the 60s NZ instead opts to upgrade their Darings with Tartar. 


Like this, you mean.... ;)

(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d165/hws5mp/The%20Whiffery/profiles/Daringre-fit2.png) (http://s35.photobucket.com/user/hws5mp/media/The%20Whiffery/profiles/Daringre-fit2.png.html)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on April 18, 2014, 06:37:56 AM
Okay, here's a little tale: the Royal Canadian Navy plays it British.

1. I'm not suggesting that this is a good idea, or an improvement on reality, it's just an interesting one that generates plenty of easy what if modelling opportunities while keeping at least within sight of realistic budgets.

2. I have no real handle on RCN naming policy, so feel free to suggest better alternatives.

3. British export aircraft would probably have Mark Numbers rather than UK letter codes, but I've used the latter to make the equipment standard clear.


1950s

HMCS Bonaventure commissions with a mixed strike/ASW air group as follows:

Air Group (all new)
Fighter/bomber : Sea Hawk
All-weather fighter : Sea Venom
ASW : Gannet AS.1
SAR/plane guard : Whirlwind


1960s

The decision is made that Bonaventure's future role will be as a North Atlantic ASW helo carrier with a small fighter detachment for scaring off Bears. There's some debate about whether to keep the Sea Hawks (fewer aircrew) or the Sea Venoms (radar) but the latter's all-weather capability wins. Bonnie serves in this configuration until 1971, by which time the Sea Venoms are looking a bit desperate.

Air Group
All-weather fighter : Sea Venom (refurbished, with Sidewinder capability)
AEW : Gannet AEW.3 (new)
ASW/SAR : Wessex HAS.1 (new)


1970s

Canada snaps up the option to buy HMS Centaur when she decommissions from the RN in 1966. A re-fit to a similar standard to HMS Hermes takes five years, at which point she commissions as HMCS Canada, replacing Bonaventure. A notable feature of the design is two Canadian Sea Sparrow launchers which extend from deck houses on the aft sponsons.

Her role is still primarily ASW so the air group is mostly new Westland Sea Kings, and since the FAA is disposing of it's Sea Vixens, the RCN is able to buy half of the FAA fleet as it's "Bear-scarers" at fire-sale prices. Most of these are RTP'd for spares to support an active fleet of about 18 aircraft, which is far more than Canada ever carries at one time. However there are no Red Tops AAMs available for them since the UK is keeping them all for the Lightning force, so the 18 active Sea Vixens are refitted by Canadair with AN/APQ-120 (F-4E) radars, and Sparrow/Sidewinder capability.

Air Group
All-weather fighter : Sea Vixen (refurbished, with Sparrow/Sidewinder capability)
AEW : Gannet AEW.3 (refurbished)
ASW/SAR : Sea King HAS.2 (new)


1980s

Although not initially impressed with the Harrier carrier concept, the Falklands War makes believers of the RCN. Unfortunately, the only immediately available Harrier carrier, HMS Invincible, is already spoken for by the RAN and the RN isn't going to pay for a fifth ship to make HMS Illustrious available any time soon. The RCN therefore elects to re-fit Canada with a ski-jump along the same lines as Hermes, as a stop-gap while a new vessel is bought. In this form, she re-enters service in about 1984.

Air Group
All-weather fighter : Sea Harrier FRS.1 (new)
AEW : Sea King AEW.5 (new)
ASW/SAR : Sea King HAS.5 (re-built from HAS.2s)


1990s

With no option of getting a new, or at least young, Harrier carrier from Britain in an acceptable time-frame, the RCN turns to America and orders a Gibbs & Cox Sea Control Ship in the mid-'80s, which is similar in design to Spain's Principe de Asturias but slightly larger. Armament is 2 x 8-cell Mk.48 VLS Sea Sparrow launchers and 4 x Vulcan Phalanx guns. With the end of the Cold War, there's much debate about cancelling the project, but she eventually commissions as HMCS Rainbow, although any hope of buying new Sea Harrier F/A.2s for her is dashed by budget cuts.

Air Group
All-weather fighter : Sea Harrier FRS.1 (refurbished with FAA mods)
AEW : Sea King AEW.5
ASW/SAR : Sea King HAS.6 (re-built from HAS.5s)


2000s

Rather than give them a life extension, Rainbow's Sea Harriers are retired in 2005 to save money and sold to India, Rainbow then becoming a pure helo carrier. Current plans are to follow the international fashion and replace her with a 20-knot, multi-purpose LPHA with a docking well, full-length  flight-deck and ski-jump for optional F-35s, however these plans are currently stalled in budget/program/political issues.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 18, 2014, 09:22:24 AM
the exception being unable to afford the new County Class DLGs to escort the new carriers in the 60s NZ instead opts to upgrade their Darings with Tartar. 


Like this, you mean.... ;)

([url]http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d165/hws5mp/The%20Whiffery/profiles/Daringre-fit2.png[/url]) ([url]http://s35.photobucket.com/user/hws5mp/media/The%20Whiffery/profiles/Daringre-fit2.png.html[/url])


 :)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 18, 2014, 10:07:22 AM
Love the Centaurs, they appear to have been almost the idea size to serve for decades after WWII, too bad there weren't more of them.  As I understand only the four completed ships were actually laid down but two of the cancelled four may have been as well but broken up on the slips on cancellation.

A whiff could be with the RAN manning the Implacables it was realised that they were to expensive and specialised for the RAN to operate post war as well as the fact that the RN wanted them back to retain and modernise them.  Colossus and Majestics were an option but in comparison to the fleet carriers of the BPF they were very limited.  Accordingly Australia negotiated the exchange, post war for three 1943 CVLs to replace the pair of improved armoured fleet carriers.  As such work continued on the entire class of eight ships at slow time with the commissioning / exchange being planned for 1948, 1950 and 1952 while the remaining ships were now to be completed for the RN to cover the modernisations of the six armoured fleet carriers.

Post was priorities saw the RN take precedence delaying the RANs new ships which saw the Implacables deployed to Korea.  This in tern lead to a very definite change of plans with the RAN Centaurs being delayed further and reordered as Hermes class modernised CVLs to operate fast jets.  To cover the delay the Implacables received an interim refit to operate jets, already able to operate Sea Vampires they also started flying Sea Venoms, Sea Hawks and Gannets (some deck park only due to hanger height issues.  As the Hermes were delayed again the RAN leased 50 F-11 Tigers from the USN to repace the Seahawks.  So impressed were the RAN with the Tigers they requested CAC, then working on an AVON Fury for the RAAF, to develop an improved radar equipped version of the Tiger to replace the Sea Venom.  CAC offered an AVON powered ADEN and Firstreak armed Ferranti Airpass equipped version that was a contemporary to the F11F-1F Super Tiger.  This successful type was ordered for both the Impacables and the Hermes, leading to the cancelation of orders for the Supermarine Scimitar.

The Hermes Class CVLs were delivered in 1960, 1962 and 1964 with US / Australian sourced air groups consisting of CAC Avon Tigers, CAC F-1 Avon Furies, Trackers, Tracers and Wessex ASW Helos.  This capable force effectively countered the threat of Indonesia moving to the Communist sphere on influence, vising tensions in Indo China, and Britains shaky commitment easy of Suez.  The ships served with regular modernisations through until the late 80s early 90s when they were converted to STOVL carriers to support air groups of F/A2 Sea Harriers and Harriers GR5/7/9 as well as Sea king ASW and AEW helicopter to replace the aging Tigers and Furies.  The cariers continued in servie through the 90s and 2000s to be replaced by a trio of QECs post 2015 with the Harriers to serve until the delivery of the F-35B around 2020.

By the time the Hermes were delivered the RN had no interest in the return of the Implacables and as such they were offered to the RAN as scrap value.  The RAN initially planed to use then as training and transport ships but with the detraining international situation decided to convert both into Commando Carriers.  They were renamed HMAS Gallipoli and HMAS Tobruk, catapults and arrester gear were removed, the lower hanger was converted into accommodation and vehicle decks and the upper hanger retained for the selected Karman Tomahawk Attack Helicopters as well as the Sprite Utility Assault version.  Later CH-53D Stallions were ordered for heavy lift and carried in the deck park only.  The ships served until the early 90s when they were replaced by a pair of US wasp Class LHDs.

 ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 31, 2014, 04:55:22 AM
Swords into plowshares (luxury ones!) anyone:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Urt3C5X_VtU/UtVUaJU8sWI/AAAAAAAANX4/Ce2hYpAOfNw/s1600/BMT+Nigel+Gee_HMS+Illustrious_Image+1.jpg)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--9PRySSq3gc/UtVUoj_-47I/AAAAAAAANYA/UMXTOKAFPYY/s1600/BMT+Nigel+Gee_HMS+Illustrious_Image+5.jpg)

Details (http://news.thehoworths.com/2014/01/aircraft-carrier-illustrious-could-be.html)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on May 31, 2014, 07:30:20 AM
I like it, now if only my dad had been a mining magnate who left me title to some of the richest ore deposits in the world and then Chinese demand went through the roof I could have bought Lusty and done it up as a week ender.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on May 31, 2014, 07:43:45 AM
Actually heres a novel idea with the Australian PM talking about buying F-35Bs and there being questions on the suitability of the Australian spec LHDs to operate them maybe Australia could buy Lusty from the UK.  Use it initially as ASW and MCM helo carrier in support of the LHDs but then ramp up and use it as a CVL once the F-35B becomes available.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 17, 2014, 02:09:48 AM
Chinese CVN…

(http://oi48.tinypic.com/2hpocc3.jpg)
(http://oi49.tinypic.com/2bd76c.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on June 17, 2014, 11:06:58 AM
Looks like a Ford to me  ???
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on June 17, 2014, 11:15:19 AM
How about a reverse Lend / Lease where the UK completed most of the 1942 CVLs as promptly and transfered them to the USN to form the core of a dozen ASW groups.  Larger and easier to modernise than the US CVLs, smaller and less expensive to operate than the Essex class they could have been kept in service for decades and could have eventually been replaced with a new US designed class.

The UK and British Commonwealth would have had to build additional ships to replace those transferred to the US leading to the completion of all of the Centaur and Audacious class carriers as well as the modernisation of more Armoured Fleet Carriers.  The Centaurs and modernised armoured fleets would be transferred to those nations who would otherwise have bought Colossus or Majestic class CVLs, either as Centaurs, Hermes or Fast Hermes Type (modernised Armoured Fleets).

UK with only 4 Audacious class ships would have had to order new carriers in the mid 50s to build / retain numbers at 5 hulls, this design would have continued in production, perhaps into the CVA01, instead of modernising the Audacious class further. 
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 22, 2014, 04:55:06 AM
Two variants of the Queen Elizabeth class:

(http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/320960_484091574965928_192756236_n.jpg)

Top is "as being built" and with ski jump and F-35Bs
Bottom is alternate CATOBAR variant with catapults and F-35Cs
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on June 22, 2014, 05:02:58 AM
Looks like a Ford to me  ???

You can't always get away from established patterns.  ;)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on June 22, 2014, 05:24:14 AM
What I find extraordinary with the QE Class, is they're not making it at least arrester hook capable.  For such a large ship (not including the USN) I can't see the logic ---  It should be able to recover aircraft which aren't STOVL don't you think ? ----
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 22, 2014, 05:46:40 AM
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSFn0OsJL8tqLXyoj_Yj703tFdRNJBfkAIInqYYhZ6KuuQwCNIA)

Need I say more?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on June 26, 2014, 11:07:05 PM
Currently reading Brown and Moores Rebuilding the Royal Navy Warship Design Since 1945 and I was surprised to read that following the cancelation of CVA-01 it was planned to build no less than six Invincibles. Also that prior to the cancelation it had been planed to build four Invincible like Escort Cruisers in addition to the three strike carriers and that the sale of a CVA-01 to Australia was seen as likely.

The Escort Cruisers were seen as replacements for the Tiger Class helicopter conversions and the fourth hull was to have been ordered instead of the ninth and tenth County Class Destroyers.

It sort of follows that had Australia bought a CVA-01 an Escort Cruiser or two may have been acquired as well.

Looking at the Escort Cruiser concepts I am considering an Invincible with a ski jump repositioned on the centreline and further forward with lifts repositioned closer to the island and weapons distributed on deck cut outs port and starboard, fore and aft.  Possibly also sponsons for the weapon systems so as not to lose too much flight deck.  As replacements for the tigers they would have needed medium calibre guns, perhaps one on each corner, backed up by a close in AA gun, 35 / 40mm, or later a CIWS and a close in missile, Seacat or later Sea Wolf or RAM.  The Area Air Defence SAM would have been installed in or adjacent to the superstructure or even aft like CVA-01.  If installed at flight deck level the SAM could have been surrounded with retractable blast deflectors

Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 05, 2014, 02:30:38 AM
Good series of pics for HMS Queen Elizabeth here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2679893/A-glimpse-Royal-Navys-future-Britains-biggest-warship-pictured-air-official-naming-The-Queen.html)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on August 15, 2014, 05:13:20 AM
Habbakuk by Bombhead on ShipBucket (click on image for more details):

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/habbakuk_1945_thule_zps98717382.png) (http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5130)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on August 15, 2014, 05:31:25 AM
Splendid carrier  :)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: raafif on August 19, 2014, 06:00:03 AM
are those red things on the sides submersible-lifeboats ?? ???
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on August 19, 2014, 06:32:01 AM
I'm figuring they are Army tanks with tracks & wheels removed.
When an improved tanks are made a crane lifts out the old and drops in the new.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on August 19, 2014, 08:00:31 AM
 ;D

Try electric motor housings, if she runs her turbines as generators, or, if she runs her turbines as internal engines, gear housings for the propellers.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: jcf on August 23, 2014, 11:57:52 AM
Yep, propulsion pods.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/icyhusky/HMS%20Habakkuk%20model%20project/scan0002.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on December 20, 2014, 09:11:11 PM
Ark Royal during sea trials prior to WWII exceeded design speed by such a significant margin it was determined that she could achieve design speed using only the outer two shafts and would have met specifications with only four boilers and two shafts.  Ark was lost when a single torpedo holed her in the single large boiler room, that stretched across the entire beam, causing uncontrollable flooding and complete loss of power, had she been completed with only two thirds of her actual propulsion plant this would have permitted separate boiler rooms and greater sub division, making her far more survivable.

Now I understand why the RN moved to the Armoured Fleet Carriers, but what if a class of improved Arks had also been built with the reduced propulsion plant and possibly only a single hanger they could have been built in less time than the Armoured Fleet Carriers, using less resources and at lower cost.  They, or a modified version, could also have been built instead of the Light Fleet Carriers, leaving the RN with a large number of capable fleet carriers post war.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on January 02, 2015, 02:31:19 PM
I'm saving to buy the Gallery/MPC USS Intrepid CV-11 to convert into a RAN variant, possibly in a later guise operating as a Marines support carrier - A-7E's & EA-7L's (navalised A-7K's modified for ECM op's), AV-8's & helo's - to go with my RAM plan or as a 1970's/80's RAN Fleet carrier perhaps operating F4D/F-6 Skyray's, S-2E/G's or S-3's, or similar.

(http://www.bnamodelworld.com/bmz_cache/4/400a41745342b4f4200f38420b8fbe6d.image.900x389.jpg)
http://www.bnamodelworld.com/gallery-models-mrc/tr-64008 (http://www.bnamodelworld.com/gallery-models-mrc/tr-64008)

I'm open to suggestions on this one but I'd prefer minimal modifications & existing after-market sets (linked if possible), as I'm trying to retain her "Essex-ness" (evolution, not revolution). RAN air assets are, also, open for discussion - RAM air assets are pretty much limited to planned builds.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 02, 2015, 02:55:05 PM
Cool idea.  Maybe have the ship transferred to the RAN instead of the HMS Majestic so as to become the alternate HMS Melbourne.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on January 02, 2015, 03:41:21 PM
I'm working on the RAN (OK, the Australian government) buying the 2 incomplete (construction halted) Essex class carriers from the US in 1946 as Fleet carriers, with the Majestic class ships immediately modified/completed as support carriers or early amphibious assault ships for the RAM, or troop transports for the Army.

Thus the Essex class ships would become Sydney & Melbourne, with the Majestic class ships named after battles, say Gallipoli & Milne Bay, or Kokoda.

I'm hoping to get hold of a 1/350 Prinz Eugen, at some stage, & she (he?) can become the war-prize vessel HMAS Canberra.

Replacement could be an indigenous light Fleet carrier class designed for Australia's force projection needs, rather than those of Europe or the US.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 02, 2015, 04:51:40 PM

I'm hoping to get hold of a 1/350 Prinz Eugen, at some stage, & she (he?) can become the war-prize vessel HMAS Canberra.



Trumpeter do one.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on January 03, 2015, 09:32:19 AM
Yep, & I'm waiting for one to come into stock at BNA, so I can hammer my funds with another big hit after buying the Intrepid (soon)! :-\
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on January 03, 2015, 09:06:36 PM
Actually how about Australia getting IJN carriers as war prizes?

The Unryu class carrier Katsuragi survived the war (although she would have needed extensive reconstruction due to bomb damage) and actually visited Australia as a repatriation transport and her sister Kasagi was 84% complete.

Interestingly Japan received three battleships as war prizes from WWI, what did Australia get, or was our share granted to Britain as we were part of the empire?  If our share was considered part of the UKs total would that same have happened in WWII, seeing us jiped again?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: raafif on January 20, 2015, 12:53:56 PM
Vindskip design cuts fuel bills - think it would make a good aircraft carrier hull ....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2913195/The-cargo-vessel-hull-huge-acts-SAIL-Innovative-design-harnesses-wind-power-reduce-fuel-consumption-half.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2913195/The-cargo-vessel-hull-huge-acts-SAIL-Innovative-design-harnesses-wind-power-reduce-fuel-consumption-half.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490)

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/16/24C2408C00000578-2913195-image-a-65_1421412353128.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on January 20, 2015, 01:16:32 PM
Regarding wind using cargo/tanker ships.  How about a high tech mast or two.  Electric motors raise/lower sails and rotate mast for best wind use.  Supplements main propulsion.  Maybe not cost effective.  Specialy if crude prices remain low.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on January 20, 2015, 11:54:14 PM
Finally decided to bite the bullet and order a resin ship (carrier included) or two from White Ensign Models and discover they have gone out of business.  They have been bought and will start up again but it was a bit of a shock.

Anyway what I was looking to get was an Ark Royal, Illustrious, Colossus, Centaur / Hermes, and Victorious all RAN of course 😊.  Also of interest was HMS London, the modernised County, had an idea involving triple or quad 6" and lots of twin 4" to represent an Australian, war built design and maybe even a post war missile upgrade.  Its not a carrier so I shouldn't be discussing it here but I also was thinking of using a County hull as the basis of a early, or even pre, war CVL.

Not building anything at the moment anyway so the orders can wait.

P.S. The carriers are six generations of the eight or nine RAN carrier generations I'm imagining with Ark being either the first or second.  Considering a modified Ark with two instead of three screws (dead easy to model in waterline) and a single hanger (trim the hull up from the waterline).  The others would be pretty much OOB, with the back story for Hermes and Vic being the RN got their two new 50000tonners approved post Suez (i.e. the US interference had the opposite effect to reality and the UK decided they needed to be able to act without US approval if necessary) and as a result the almost complete modernised carriers and the Tigers were surplus to requirements just as Australia was deciding what to replace her existing carriers and cruisers with.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 08, 2015, 11:43:53 PM
According to Wikipedia (so pinch of salt required) Iran wanted to order three Invincible class carriers and 25 Seaharriers but cancelled (suggests an order) or just didn't go ahead due to manning issues and RN losing interest in the project (not clear whether this was the Iranian project or their own).

Now for the what if part, lets say Irans order went ahead and there were an extra three Invincibles and 25 Seaharriers under construction when the Iranian revolution occurred.  Now would these ships have been the same as the RNs or would they have been modified with US systems to better fit with the US and Dutch ships on order, i.e. Standard, Mk-13 or 26 GMLS, SPG-51, SPS-48 and 49 etc. that would make them less suitable for the RN but far more attractive for Australia, Canada and the Netherlands. 

Wiki says the Iranian project was cancelled in 1976 so RN spec'ed ships could have easily been laid down and possibly launched before the revolution, while modified vessels would have taken longer to prepare (detail design, integration of US systems etc.) so the first would likely not have been laid down until latter and probably would not have been launched before 1979.  If more extensive changes were made, GE LM2500 GTs instead of Olympus for example, they may have been delayed even further and may not ever have been completed.  Anyway this is all make believe so we have a number of interesting possibilities, extra Invincibles available for service in the Falklands, or shortly after, and some very interesting export options, particularly the US combat system versions.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on April 15, 2015, 11:40:55 PM
... [snip] ... Anyway this is all make believe so we have a number of interesting possibilities, extra Invincibles available for service in the Falklands, or shortly after, and some very interesting export options, particularly the US combat system versions.

Hello, Australia! ;)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 02, 2015, 06:16:52 AM
It's not widely known that the New HMAS Canberra is an Imperial Navy Ship...

(http://toryume.ipage.com/public_files/canberralhdtour/thumb/IMG_2486.jpg)

From here:  A picture tour of HMAS Canberra LHD L02 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?245915-A-picture-tour-of-HMAS-Canberra-LHD-L02&p=7638076#post7638076)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on May 25, 2015, 02:19:30 AM
How about when Sandys 1957 White Paper predicts the imminent end of manned combat aircraft the RNs carriers are re-rolled as strike carriers, specifically tasked with finding and destroying mobile ballistic missile launchers.  As fighters are to be replaced with SAMs and ballistic missiles can destroy any fixed target, the sole missions requiring manned aircraft are the location and destruction of mobile ballistic missile platforms, be they TELs, surface ships, or submarines. 

This anti ballistic missile launch platform mission has priority over all else which means as many carriers as possible are needed i.e. Albion and Bulwark are retained as carriers, new ships are designed and built, bringing the carrier fleet to ten (twice real world) and the Colossus class are converted into CVS to hunt SSGs, SSBs and SSBNs, the Sea Vixen is retired and replaced with multiple guided missile ships (converted and new destroyers and cruisers), Scimitar is rerolled as a strike platform and the Buccaneer is evolved into a ballistic missile launcher hunting TSR, while plans for a supersonic replacement are brought forward. 

This changes the future structure of the RN such that they end up with a class of, smaller than CVA01, strike carriers, each operating two squadrons of Tornado fleet interceptors, another two squadrons of Tornado strike aircraft and a detachment of AEW, possibly E-2s and a pair of SAR helicopters.  These are complemented by a much larger number of guided missile ships, including a class of Escort Cruiser (guided missile armed helicopter, command cruisers, resembling but smaller than the Invincible class light carriers), a class of gun / missile cruisers, as well as County class DLGs and a variety of new build and converted DDGs and FFGs.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on May 25, 2015, 07:38:10 AM
And, don't forget, further development of the Buccaneer into Gen 2 & 3 designs (maybe even Gen 4!).
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on May 28, 2015, 04:09:16 PM
Wonder if 1/350 CVA-58 kits would sell ?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 29, 2015, 02:52:30 AM
Wonder if 1/350 CVA-58 kits would sell ?

I would buy one.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on May 29, 2015, 10:16:53 AM
Wonder if 1/350 CVA-58 kits would sell ?
I admit to being tempted, do one as built and one as overhauled with steam catapults, angled deck, etc.  Much like I'd like to do a "stock" Montana-class, circa 1991, and a battle-carrier, FACES II style, built off it.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on May 29, 2015, 01:32:43 PM
I don't know about 1/350 but I would definitely go for one in 1/700.

According to Freidman in "The Post War Naval Revolution", one of the RN carrier specs from the early 50s was 1000' length and capable of operating a Canberra sized bomber, as well as able to cross deck any USN carrier type.  This is pretty much CVA-58 size and the CVA-58 also had more in common with the UK designs then previous US designs.  The type was also seen specifically as a bomber, or strike carrier and would have to have been escorted by a Midway and / or Essexs, Friedman also mentioned this, i.e. four groups, each with a CVA-58, a Midway and two Essex (one group would have an extra Essex in lieu of a Midway).

All this great looking B-58 art and whiffing got me thinking how nice one would look in an EDSG over white Buccaneer scheme.  Now a strike carrier with perhaps Canberras, then later B-47s and Valiants before Hustlers would be fun.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 30, 2015, 05:39:53 AM
I don't know about 1/350 but I would definitely go for one in 1/700.



You might be in luck...

(http://static.wixstatic.com/media/86d731_4d7786e5232b4e2490f4d673fedcbd86.jpg_srb_p_1200_585_75_22_0.50_1.20_0.00_jpg_srb)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: The Big Gimper on September 10, 2015, 08:45:06 AM
Folks:

I found this while looking for add'l Korean S-3 Viking info.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gtPqSoXq304/U-V-mLGHYeI/AAAAAAAADY8/6P4npC7DRTw/s1600/World+CVs.jpg)

Mods: Feel free to relocate if you think it belongs somewhere else.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on September 18, 2015, 12:17:07 PM
Pick a carrier you like and up size it.
Example:  Enterprise CVN-65 1/350, 1/400, 1/600, 1/720 kits are out there.  Maybe others.
Build 1/600 hull & flight deck.  Use 1/720 bridge, fittings, aircraft.  Enterprise is now 20% larger.
Wonder how many would notice at model show.
Do same with 1/350 hull & flight deck.  Now it is supersized to 206%.

Or use two different aircraft carriers instead of same carrier in two scales.

Skywave makes many 1/700 aircraft.  Could even have SR-71 on catapult of 1/350 Enterprise.
Is tempting deviation from 1/72 builds.....     part of 1/700 fleet diorama?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on September 19, 2015, 03:26:19 AM
Does anyone know of any kit of the Charles de Gaulle other than the Heller 1/400 one?

Similarly, does anyone know of any kit of the new Queen Elizabeth class?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on September 20, 2015, 01:25:26 AM
HP models do one but stuffed if I can find any info on it.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: TurboCoupeTurbo on September 26, 2015, 02:10:47 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/23/europe/france-egypt-warship-sale/?iid=ob_article_organicsidebar_expansion&iref=obnetwork (http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/23/europe/france-egypt-warship-sale/?iid=ob_article_organicsidebar_expansion&iref=obnetwork)

France is attempting to sell the two Mistral's ordered by Russia to Egypt.

Fun ideas could be had in who else they could have sold them to.  UK? USA? Australia? India?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on September 26, 2015, 05:27:53 AM
The fact that they are supposedly fitted out for Russian equipment would limit their usefulness (without potentially major modification work) for the likes of the US, UK and Australia.  Moreover, in cases like Australia, the similarly sized Canberra class LHDs are already entering service so no need.  India might have been a potential but I think they are now focusing on domestic production.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: TurboCoupeTurbo on September 26, 2015, 10:34:18 AM
According to the article, all the Russian equipment would be returned to Russia.  So whoever bought them would need to have new equipment added anyway.

But in the What If would of plastic, all cable runs work for any and every system  :P
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on September 26, 2015, 12:52:37 PM
Interesting. All that the return of the Russian equipment means is that they are essentially unfinished, which means they're probably in a good state to be refitted to a new customer's spec. It's a pity the UK couldn't afford at least one of them to compliment HMS Ocean: it's always been an odd anomaly that we only have one LPH in the amphibious force when we have two of everything else.

Here's a thought: what if the UN bought them and equipped them as disaster relief vessels? No weapons, just unarmed helos and landing craft. They'd be ideal for going into somewhere hit by a typhoon or earthquake that's destroyed the infrastructure.

If not the UN, then how about one for the US Coast Guard? One in the Carribean would be a no-brainer. The other one would probably be best located in the Indian Ocean, but who would operate it? India would probably want the contract to build one if they were going to bear the cost of operating it.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on September 26, 2015, 06:46:58 PM
Here's a thought: what if the UN bought them and equipped them as disaster relief vessels? No weapons, just unarmed helos and landing craft. They'd be ideal for going into somewhere hit by a typhoon or earthquake that's destroyed the infrastructure.

............................................ One in the Carribean would be a no-brainer. The other one would probably be best located in the Indian Ocean, but who would operate it? India would probably want the contract to build one if they were going to bear the cost of operating it.

International crew operating out of Perth (the Australian one). Mind you, we'd probably have less trouble manning that than the Navy will the Canberra's.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on October 28, 2015, 01:36:04 PM
Got a 1/350 CV-67.  Can use it as base kit to bash into 1/700 CVN mega carrier.  See below.
Skywave and Trumpeter have kits of 1/700 aircraft.  Be big enough to carry large and varied airgroup.
Only carrier with F3F, F4U, F-18 (among others) deployed at same time.


Pick a carrier you like and up size it.
Example:  Enterprise CVN-65 1/350, 1/400, 1/600, 1/720 kits are out there.  Maybe others.
Build 1/600 hull & flight deck.  Use 1/720 bridge, fittings, aircraft.  Enterprise is now 20% larger.
Wonder how many would notice at model show.
Do same with 1/350 hull & flight deck.  Now it is supersized to 206%.

Or use two different aircraft carriers instead of same carrier in two scales.

Skywave makes many 1/700 aircraft.  Could even have SR-71 on catapult of 1/350 Enterprise.
Is tempting deviation from 1/72 builds.....     part of 1/700 fleet diorama?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Weaver on October 28, 2015, 02:02:28 PM
Pick a carrier you like and up size it.
Example:  Enterprise CVN-65 1/350, 1/400, 1/600, 1/720 kits are out there.  Maybe others.
Build 1/600 hull & flight deck.  Use 1/720 bridge, fittings, aircraft.  Enterprise is now 20% larger.
Wonder how many would notice at model show.
Do same with 1/350 hull & flight deck.  Now it is supersized to 206%.

Or use two different aircraft carriers instead of same carrier in two scales.

Skywave makes many 1/700 aircraft.  Could even have SR-71 on catapult of 1/350 Enterprise.
Is tempting deviation from 1/72 builds.....     part of 1/700 fleet diorama?

Get an Airfix 1/600th Victorious and fit it with a modified bridge from a 1/700th Invincible plus 1/700th Phantoms and Buccs. That makes her a 41,500 ton "modern" fixed wing carrier: scaled down alternative to CVA-01 perhaps?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on October 28, 2015, 07:32:52 PM
Weaver thankyou yet again some of the ideas you come up with are just outstanding!  I actually have an Airfix Victorious I built many years ago that is in a pretty sorry state after a number of house moves that could do with a birthday.

* Just crunched the figures and length and beam comes out very close to the Malta class, you could actually say it is a modernised Malta or that some or all of the Maltas were completed to a modified design along the lines of Hermes, perhaps instead of modernising Eagle, Ark and Victorious.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on October 31, 2015, 03:06:26 PM
Please post pictures if this build is started !
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on October 31, 2015, 05:49:25 PM
It is very tempting but I have a shocking record of getting stuff finished, I have some WIPs that are so old I forgot I had them at all and struggle to remember what I was planning. 

For example I have an almost complete, mostly painted HMS Iron Duke that I think was intended to be something or other RAN, my County class DLG and I recently dug out an assembled but unpainted M-60A1 that I couldn't remember at all until I also found the three Verlinden accessory kits I bought to complete it as an Israeli Blazer M-60 all well before any complete blazer m-60 kits were available.

I almost did start the Victorious / Malta scalorama the other day bit hit a critical hurdle, I literally have nowhere to work on it where it won't be destroyed or damaged by pets or a four year old.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: jcf on November 01, 2015, 01:31:46 PM
Paul, don't feel bad about that shit, I have 'still in progress' builds that were started in 1988.
A couple of which had some work done in the early '90s while I was splitting my time between
living on a junk and under a tarp in the 'staff quarters' of a youth hostel in Waikiki.   
You'll find a way and it'll be done when it's done. ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on November 01, 2015, 08:45:55 PM
Paul, don't feel bad about that shit, I have 'still in progress' builds that were started in 1988.
A couple of which had some work done in the early '90s while I was splitting my time between
living on a junk and under a tarp in the 'staff quarters' of a youth hostel in Waikiki.   
You'll find a way and it'll be done when it's done. ;D

Thanks John, I'll get there one day, but a lotto win permitting the purchase of a semi rural block with a large, air-conditioned industrial shed would help. ;)

Actually got quite a large stash of carrier kits now but the old Victorious is the only that I've started.

Weavers idea is fantastic it just ticks so many of my carrier whiffing boxes, such as why would the UK transfer /sell bigger carriers to Australia when they had the need and the money, i.e. late forties/early fifties/early sixties.  Why, because they actually built the Malta's, see I have a model of a modernised one to prove it. 

Building the four Malta's is why the UK kept several of their Colossus and Majestic class carriers into the 60s, before replacing them with Escort Cruisers but disposed of Armoured Fleet carriers, the Audacious and Centaur/Hermes classes, the Malta's simply carried so many more, larger, more capable aircraft, that there was never the need to retain the larger small carriers, or the smaller large carriers.  Four modernised Malta hulls supported by five or six modernised 1942 light fleet carriers (CVS/LPH) did everything the RN needed, at lower cost than messing around with the other types, which were transferred to navies where their intermediate sizes would be more useful.

UK keeping CVS 1942s means an updated Gannet fit for service into the 70s could work, maybe a transonic / supersonic replacement for the Seahawk and Sea Venom (RN FAA Sea Hunter / Osprey P.1083/1109B hybrid) which would be suitable as third generation types for the exported 1942s.

Follow on is that navies that acquired straight deck 1942 Light Fleets could then replace them with modernised Centaur/Hermes class, or perhaps even an Audacious.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on January 02, 2016, 12:53:16 AM
From the Mosquito thread I am trying to come up with a believable scenario that would give the UK a class of affordable big deck carriers instead of the Implacables and possibly Indomitable.  I understand the logic of the Armoured Fleet Carriers, the assumption they would be hit and that there was no way the number and type of fighter aircraft available to the RN would be able to defend the carriers (or fleet for that matter) from the sort of intense land based air attack they expected to encounter and that these ships were designed as, treaty compliant, strike carriers able to weather air attack.  The issue as I understand it was the experts calculated that fighters could never be scrambled fast enough to defend the ships given the expected warning times, therefore the ships would have to rely on their, guns, manoeuvrability and armour.

The issue is the first four were laid down in 1937 and the final pair in 1939 before being suspended in 1940 and how to either get the Implacables completed (maybe laid down in 37 or 38 with the first four) much earlier to a modified Indomitable design with higher hangers (two at 16' instead of one 14' and one 16' or both 14'), completed as Indomitables, or cancelled.  The idea is the Implacables not compete for resources with escorts (as well as the final pair of KGVs) and a larger, non 2nd London Treaty compliment, design could be ordered in 1940 instead, perhaps also instead of the 1942 Light Fleet Carriers.  The RN would then have the same four carriers completed before the end of 1941 with the possibility of an additional two in service by mid 1942.  More importantly, a new design, capable of operating larger numbers of larger aircraft could then have been available by mid 1944.

Design pressures on the British carriers were the 22,000 ton treaty limit, the folded height of their biplane strike (torpedo) bombers, Swordfish at just under 14', the folded height of their amphibian aircraft, Walrus at just under 16' and the length, folded width and weight of either.  The non folding wings of the Sea Hurricanes and initial Seafires saw the Implacables modified during build with wider forward aircraft lifts, while the deletion of the requirement to hanger Walrus or Otter amphibians was one of the justifications for the 14' hanger height accepted on the Implacables, though stupidly the Albacore was 14'2" and the Barracuda 15'2" so one wonders what strike aircraft the admiralty expected them to operate.

I'm going to throw in a new design pressure, the carriers of the Home and Mediterranean Fleets were expected to operate within range of higher performance land based bombers, therefore it follows that their strike aircraft would be operating within range of land based heavy fighters and as such would need to be of significantly higher performance themselves to have any hope of surviving to do their job.  This would make the Fairy Battle / Hawker Henley the absolute minimum starting point for a torpedo, let alone dive bomber, but more likely the Bristol Blenheim or Beaufort.  So my new design pressure is the new carriers and possibly part or even the entire Illustrious class, it having been determined that scrambling interceptors will be ineffective, therefore not worth carrying and that existing and planned TSR (Swordfish/Albacore), dive bomber/fighter and turret fighters designs will be so outmatched that it is doubtful they could push home a strike, that the decision is made to design the carriers from the start to operate large, powerfully armed, long ranged, high performance twin engined fighter and torpedo bombers, i.e. the Beaufighter.

Designed to operate a Blenheim sized, folding wing, heavy fighter and torpedo bomber would required 45'x30' 20-25000lb elevators, arrestor gear and barriers designed to stop 15-20000lb aircraft and catapults for 20-25000lb aircraft.  Above all hanger height would need to be greater as twin engines would likely force the use of vertically folding wings, this alone could force the adoption of a 17' or greater hanger height.  This would actually be true to the RNs doctrine at the time of regarding the carriers as a strike platform with Beaufighters and perhaps Blenheims or Beauforts instead of Skuas, Fulmars and Swordfish.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 17, 2016, 08:59:04 AM
Something I just noticed, the new USN Ford class carriers have a crew size similar to that of the cancelled CVA-01 class.  Considering that the US always tends to ensure they have dedicated damage control parties in addition to regular crew that suggests that the crew levels are basically identical if in fact the CVA-01 doesn't have a slightly larger crew.

Carrying this forward, had the CVA-01been built for the RN and RAN then the Fords could have been a realistic replacement.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 20, 2016, 12:15:44 PM
Possibly...though remember that the same crewing pressures/technological developments that have reduced the USN crews over the last 40-50yrs have also applied to others so you would most likely also expect to see the RN/RAN proportionally smaller as well.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 20, 2016, 02:24:09 PM
True but many of those advances are linked to the platform so only come into play when a new platform is designed and built.  Besides that just about the only way to cut costs on an in service carrier is to reduce the size of the air group.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 03, 2016, 06:29:09 PM
Has there ever been a trainable box launcher proposed/trialed for Tartar/Standard missiles?

(Wanting to find out if what I saw at Shipbucket is indeed one of those "never-built" designs......)

========================================================================

The "Through Deck Cruisers" (Invincibles) and the abortive CVA-01 were both designed with their own defensive weaponry, but they add to the firepower of their own properly-armed and -equipped escorts.

========================================================================

Although the G.91 is generally considered a strike aircraft, it's actually no less of a "fighter" than a Gnat Mk.1, with high-subsonic performance, an Orpheus engine, guns and no radar.

Portuguese put Sidewinders on their G.91s and employed the jets as interceptors during the UN arms embargo.

Sorry for the really really late response but the Mk-16 ASROC launcher had versions that also fired Harpoon and Standard (I assume this was the Standard ARM in an anti surface role).  The Mk-25 eight round box launcher from the Basic Point Defense Missile System (BPMS) can handle quad packed missile canisters developed to fire ESSM from the MK-41 VLS, so presumably could also handle Standard MR.  So technically either the ASROC or BPMS launchers could have been used as trainable Tartar/Standard launchers.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on March 03, 2016, 11:52:30 PM
Another though, what if the UK laid down and built the Colossus class as in reality but when they were about to order the Majestics with their various design changes to permit the operation of heavier aircraft it was decided instead to skip them all together and order the design they had planned for the following year instead.  Because of this the Majestic class were actually built to the 1943 or Centaur design leading to the completion ten Colossus, six Majestic reordered as Centaurs and all four original Centaurs being completed as Hermes'. 
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on June 06, 2016, 09:33:01 AM
I am posting this picture here only because I don't think that the Republic of China Navy would embarrass themselves by posting in an official naval museum an artist impression, however crude it might be, of a future ROCN fleet that they aren't serious about trying to build.  I think it is likely to be depicting a LHA rather than a CVL though.

(http://i.imgur.com/7RCFbnE.jpg)

And the bitter lesson of their 1950s and early-1960s naval clash with the PLAN hasn't been entirely forgotten- for ships that aren't meant to do shore bombardment missions, having punchy, rapid-reacting, rapid-firing guns is more important than having big guns.

The original picture HERE (http://i.imgur.com/CJWCKXT.jpg)!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on October 23, 2016, 03:46:57 AM
Something different:  Deck cleaner on Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov:

(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/quai_du_temps/11669085/121704/121704_900.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on November 24, 2016, 07:39:15 AM
Something different:  Deck cleaner on Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov:

([url]http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/quai_du_temps/11669085/121704/121704_900.jpg[/url])


Klimov VK-1?

You've got to hand it to the Soviet's/Russian's regarding the ability to devise simple and economical solutions!

M.A.D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on November 25, 2016, 02:00:58 AM
Tim the Toolman's Leafblower...

https://youtu.be/hLnFdYt4yZw
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on February 06, 2017, 09:49:25 AM
This picture recently got me wondering......

I've been on-and-off thinking of the idea of a large seaplane cruiser in support of STOBAR or STOVL aircraft carriers (not thinking of any nation in particular- Rule of Cool, people), as I am under the impression that large flying boats and amphibians would have a better chance at fulfilling aerial tanker role and flying higher with AEW gears than helicopters......

I understand that helicopters can takeoff and land (by virtue of operating off a flight deck instead of a water surface) under rougher weathers than most flying boats can.  The flying boat that I can think of with the best rough weather capability would be the Shin Maywa US-1/US-2.

Is it safe to assume that smaller flying boats wouldn't have enough "room" for features comparable to those of the US-1/US-2 (able to land in seas up to 3 metres in height, according to Wikipedia; I don't know if I should care about the boundary layer control system......)?

And, finally, how many AEW planes and aerial tankers would I need to support, say, the carrier airwing of a Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier?

Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on February 19, 2017, 01:09:39 AM
An interesting comparison:

(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/image.jpg1_zpslyj3sbrk.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on February 19, 2017, 11:05:47 AM
An interesting comparison:

([url]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/image.jpg1_zpslyj3sbrk.jpg[/url])


The cats are longer than the CVE!

Been thinking on my idea of the US licence producing the 1942 and possibly 1943 Design Light Fleet Carriers during WWII, they could have been built faster and used multiple US systems, say half CL (50,000shp), CA (60,000shp), even half Essex (75,000shp) machinery while the Centaurs would use half an Iowa/Midway set, US radars and AA guns, initially multiple Bofors, then 3"L50s and finally a uniform 3" battery.  Initially built for lend Lease to the UK they are then also adopted by the USN as they are vastly superior to the US CVEs and CVLs for supporting amphibious operations etc. in particular they are much better at operating the at time challenging Corsair, making them ideal as Marine or "Gator" carriers.

Post war both types would be idea as CVS ASW Carriers in the USNs HUK groups, being much more capable than the Independence Class but much cheaper to operate than the Essex.  Together with the retention of the Gator Mission operating marine fighter and attack squadrons, vertical envelopment was also developed and trialled, these ships proving ideal, again as they were superior aviation platforms to the US designed CVLs and far cheaper to operate than the Essex class.

The immediate result of the availability of US built 1942 designs from mid 1944 was the RN went from having too few carriers to having far more carriers than they could crew.  With the intricacies of Lend Lease the UK couldn't simply pass the US sourced ships onto other navies, the flow on from this being transfer of existing and new build UK carriers to, first the Commonwealth, then to other allied nations during the last year of the war.  This included not just the Colossus Class being commissioned straight into service with Canada, Australia and New Zealand but also in the Australia taking the compromised Implacables, as well as Canada, France and the Netherlands taking over one each of the original three Armoured Fleet Carriers once the US built Centaurs began to arrive.  The most interesting, and divisive transfer was that of Indomitable to the Soviet Union in early 1945.

These transfers actually quite suited different elements in the UK for a number of reasons, for the Battleship Admirals (Frazer etc.) it meant that they had divested the RN of unnecessary dead weight and would simply return the US built ships post way and get back to the sort of ships they really needed, battleships and cruisers.  For the progressive Admirals, mostly concentrated in the British Pacific Fleet at this point, it meant they could get to work developing the next generation of ships to operate jet aircraft using innovative new technologies without the burden of a legacy fleet, as the new ships were commissioned the old ones would be returned to the US for them to dispose of as they desired.  Without the 6 Armoured Fleets and 8(+2) Colossus Class, the RN completed all eight Centaurs and the three Audacious class ships, while slowing and redesigning the Maltas, which were completed during the 50s to a configuration not dissimilar to that of the (alternate) reconstructed Victorious and Eagle. 

Interestingly the six Majestics never existed as the US built 1942s incorporated their improvements from the start and with ships from the US due to arrive much fast than they could have been built in the UK it made sense to use the resources for other more critical projects, as well as not so critical but politically important ones, such as completing Vanguard and laying down the Lions.  End result the UK entered the 1950s with three modern Audacious Class Armoured Fleet Carriers, eight modern Centaur Class Light Fleet Carriers, one Vanguard Class Battleship and two of four KGV Class Battleships in service, with four Malta Class Large Fleet Carriers under construction to an improved design and at least two of four Lion Class Battleships building to a new design incorporation advanced air defence radars and missile systems, land attack cruise missiles as well as their big guns.

Needless to say little of this survived Duncan Sandys 1957 defence review (carnal house of horrors), but then again as he had been working on this travesty since he was Minister of Supply prior to holding defence, even far less ambitious programs would have fallen to his ill conceived, illogical, ideological crusade.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on March 08, 2017, 11:13:39 PM
I am posting this picture here only because I don't think that the Republic of China Navy would embarrass themselves by posting in an official naval museum an artist impression, however crude it might be, of a future ROCN fleet that they aren't serious about trying to build.

Sounds more and more like they are thinking of acquiring one.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on March 11, 2017, 06:40:44 AM
Interesting:  http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/572/Ruler-Class.aspx (http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/572/Ruler-Class.aspx)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 17, 2017, 03:28:13 AM
(http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/barquitos/P-Files/Ultracarrier3.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: The Big Gimper on April 17, 2017, 06:20:26 PM
Where did you find this Greg?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 18, 2017, 01:49:01 AM
Reference was found over on Secret Projects:

Donald M. Fort, a Defense Constultant for Analytic Services, Inc. and formerly the Rand Corporation, the Center for Naval Analyses, and the US Air Force, wrote an article titled "Ultracarrier" in Proceedings of the US Naval Institute that appeared in its December 1978 issue. In this article, Fort proposed an even larger aircraft carrier than the Enterprise and Nimitz-classes, with a length of 1,310 feet and a displacement of 500,000 tons full load at a cost of $828 million in 1976 dollars.

Specifications of Fort "Ultracarrier"

Dimensions (feet)
    Length (total): 1,310
    Length (waterline): 1,250
    Beam (waterline): 280
    Draft (maximum): 75
    Flight deck width: 400

Displacement (long tons)
    Light ship: 400,000
    Full load: 500,000

Propulsion
    Nuclear (shp) 280,000
    Conventional (shp) 120,000
    No. of shafts: 6

Aviation Features
    No. of aircraft: 100
    No. of aviation elevators: 4
    No. of catapults: 6

Speed (knots)
    Maximum 26
    Cruise (nuclear) 23

Has the Department of the Navy or Department of Defense ever considered carriers larger than Enterprise or Nimitz class and was Fort's proposal ever given consideration?

Or prior to the ordering of CVN-71, USS Theodore Roosevelt, during the Reagan Administration, were previous carrier proposals only based on Elmo Zumwalt's "High-Low" philosophy: VTOL Support Ship (VSS), Sea Control Ship (SCS), or CVV (Aircraft Carrier, Medium Sized)?

Fort, Donald "Ultracarrier" Proceedings of the US Naval Institute (December 1978):
([url]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/barquitos/P-Files/Ultracarrier1.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/barquitos/P-Files/Ultracarrier2.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/barquitos/P-Files/Ultracarrier3.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/barquitos/P-Files/Ultracarrier4.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/barquitos/P-Files/Ultracarrier5.jpg[/url])
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kim margosein on April 18, 2017, 08:53:32 AM
It's got 4 times the displacement of the Nimitz, with only about 40% more power.   It will probably need special channels to get to the naval bases it would need to dock at, assuming they have docks to handle them.  And all this for SIX MORE AIRCRAFT????
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 25, 2017, 05:08:07 AM
New Russian carrier anyone:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4440760/Russia-plans-build-world-s-biggest-aircraft-carrier.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4440760/Russia-plans-build-world-s-biggest-aircraft-carrier.html)

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/04/24/17/3F9094EC00000578-4440760-image-a-43_1493051541417.jpg)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/04/24/17/3F90A7B200000578-4440760-image-a-46_1493051557044.jpg)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/04/24/17/3F90A7A600000578-4440760-image-a-44_1493051543985.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: The Big Gimper on April 25, 2017, 06:00:21 AM
There are three AWAC/AEW thing-a-ma-bobs!

Is it a Yak-44E?

(http://i.imgur.com/X6I03.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 25, 2017, 06:06:00 AM
Looking at the blown up pictures, I would say yes.

speaking of which, is anyone aware of a kit of the Yak-44E?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on April 25, 2017, 12:18:37 PM
I love how some proclaim the end of the road for USN super carriers because of this or that Russian or Chinese super weapon yet there are both Russia and China developing new carriers to try and compete with the USNs existing fleet.  ???
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 26, 2017, 01:59:41 AM
There are always a multitude of naysayers out there - the same thing happens constantly with the F-35 with detractors claiming 'stealth' is dead and that some Russian/Chinese system can outwit it whilst ignoring the fact that the Russians/Chinese are developing their own platforms such as the T-50 and J-20...
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on April 26, 2017, 02:36:21 AM
Looking at the blown up pictures, I would say yes.

speaking of which, is anyone aware of a kit of the Yak-44E?


There's a 1/200 scale one which I saw in google images when searching with 'Yak-44E' and there's a very neat larger model (I think) on
this web site (scroll to bottom)

http://www.airvectors.net/avyak40.html (http://www.airvectors.net/avyak40.html)

But I've always said the Russians and now Chinese only copy what the west have done, albeit with using whatever technology they have or understand.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 26, 2017, 02:42:08 AM
I believe the one shown in the AirVectors site is a 1/66 paper one:  http://maquettes.hautetfort.com/archive/2010/11/09/4-yak-44-aew.html (http://maquettes.hautetfort.com/archive/2010/11/09/4-yak-44-aew.html)

My own research has also turned up these: 

1/200:  http://www.ussr-airspace.com/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=2792 (http://www.ussr-airspace.com/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=2792)
1/144 (part of this Anigrand kit): https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/ani/kit_ani_4006.shtml (https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/ani/kit_ani_4006.shtml)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on May 01, 2017, 07:19:52 AM
I love how some proclaim the end of the road for USN super carriers because of this or that Russian or Chinese super weapon yet there are both Russia and China developing new carriers to try and compete with the USNs existing fleet.  ???

Although IMO the USN seriously needs to bring back the S-3 Viking or something more up to date!!
It's carrier-based ASW capability is seriously lacking  :(

M.A.D 
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on May 01, 2017, 08:49:29 AM
I love how some proclaim the end of the road for USN super carriers because of this or that Russian or Chinese super weapon yet there are both Russia and China developing new carriers to try and compete with the USNs existing fleet.  ???

Although IMO the USN seriously needs to bring back the S-3 Viking or something more up to date!!
It's carrier-based ASW capability is seriously lacking  :(
SV-22B anyone?  I've got a concept sketched for that. Dipping sonar in place of the center hoist, modified lower ramp with sonobuoy dispensers and the deploy/retract gear for a MAD bomb; perhaps a modified nose profile for a search radar.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: jcf on May 01, 2017, 12:20:48 PM
I love how some proclaim the end of the road for USN super carriers because of this or that Russian or Chinese super weapon yet there are both Russia and China developing new carriers to try and compete with the USNs existing fleet.  ???

Although IMO the USN seriously needs to bring back the S-3 Viking or something more up to date!!
It's carrier-based ASW capability is seriously lacking  :(

M.A.D

USN operate the P-8, ditto India and Oz, and it will be going into service with the UK and Norway, Japan has the P-1 which is in the process of replacing the P-3 Orions, so much of the worlds oceans is/will be covered, by land-based elements, which renders limited range carrier based elements largely moot. If a carrier based
ASW element comes back it'll probably be in the form of a UCAV, for multiple reasons.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on May 04, 2017, 01:00:27 AM
Quote
USN operate the P-8, ditto India and Oz, and it will be going into service with the UK and Norway, Japan has the P-1 which is in the process of replacing the P-3 Orions, so much of the worlds oceans is/will be covered, by land-based elements, which renders limited range carrier based elements largely moot. If a carrier based ASW element comes back it'll probably be in the form of a UCAV, for multiple reasons.
The problem with relying upon land based patrol for a sea based combat group is transit time. A 4 or 6 plane element on a carrier can keep 1 or 2 aircraft on patrol pretty continuously. To do that in the middle of the Atlantic (much less the Pacific) with land based P3 or P8s wold require a lot more aircraft as they would be spending an inordinate amount of time transiting to the patrol area. Not only does it drastically increase the number of aircraft required in the fleet, but those assets are very vulnerable if transiting, all alone, anywhere near the bad guys, which they probably would be.

No, the USN is seriously lacking in carrier-borne ASW assets.

Paul
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 04, 2017, 02:13:44 AM

The problem with relying upon land based patrol for a sea based combat group is transit time. A 4 or 6 plane element on a carrier can keep 1 or 2 aircraft on patrol pretty continuously. To do that in the middle of the Atlantic (much less the Pacific) with land based P3 or P8s wold require a lot more aircraft as they would be spending an inordinate amount of time transiting to the patrol area. Not only does it drastically increase the number of aircraft required in the fleet, but those assets are very vulnerable if transiting, all alone, anywhere near the bad guys, which they probably would be.

This is where the MQ-9C Triton as developed under the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) program comes in.  It's 30 odd hr endurance and capabilities allow it and other platforms such as P-8s to complement each other to ensure the necessary surveillance coverage is provided.

Moreover, please don't fall into the mistake of thinking that these platforms are primarily ASW platforms.  These platforms (like the P-3 and others) probably spend more time doing ASuW.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on May 10, 2017, 04:24:43 AM
This is where the MQ-9C Triton as developed under the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) program comes in.  It's 30 odd hr endurance and capabilities allow it and other platforms such as P-8s to complement each other to ensure the necessary surveillance coverage is provided.
As long as you're not expending anything like sonobouys as part of the oversight, then a 30 hr endurance is good, but these things don't have a lot of payload capability, by and large.

Quote
Moreover, please don't fall into the mistake of thinking that these platforms are primarily ASW platforms.  These platforms (like the P-3 and others) probably spend more time doing ASuW.
Not sure what you mean here. Are you saying that old S-3s were not primarily ASW or are you talking about the current plans for using P-8s? Certainly at the moment the P-3s and P-8s do a lot of ASuW/recce patrolling, but in s a wartime situation, CVBGs need a ton of ASW support and this is where I think that a dedicated wing of ASW aircraft is bot lacking and needed by the USN (and most other navies, for that matter).

Paul
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on June 05, 2017, 02:08:54 AM
Now that the F-35 is beginning to strut it's stuff, the current Canadian Government is now trying to welch on another campaign promise (IMHO). Seems that the ongoing spat between Boeing and the Government means that the F-18E/F deal is quickly going sour. This brings me to something I thought back some months ago would be a good idea. The RCN need a bunch of new ships and I thought the route Australia has taken with HMAS Canberra and Adelaide would be ideal for Canada too, but swap some of the F-35A's Canada is supposed to be signing on to, for some F-35B's and take the Spanish route with their similar carrier.

But what is wrong with these carriers ?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 05, 2017, 02:22:46 AM
But what is wrong with these carriers ?

One could comment "Is there anything wrong...".  That aside though, it depends upon your context:

Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on June 05, 2017, 03:01:28 AM
But what is wrong with these carriers ?

One could comment "Is there anything wrong...".  That aside though, it depends upon your context:

  • Are we talking about technical aspects of the designs themselves?


Well I read a while ago, both the Australian ones have some sort of engine problem. Googling it doesn't reveal very much except the Spanish one also has problems, although not the same problem.  But there seems to be some design flaw in them -----

The whole concept of the ship would suit a Canadian role very well I think, the RCAF have got their C-17's to get the response teams to wherever quickly without going to the 'neighbours' to ask for a ride. Having your own support ships to take your own people for same said response (with military aircraft if needed) seems to me to follow the same line.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on June 06, 2017, 08:59:24 AM
Well, neither of the Aussie ships are carriers, to begin with. They are LHDs, amphibious assault craft designed to support a landing with helos only. They are not equipped for fixed wing aviation either organic or visiting. The decks, to be specific are not up to the F-35s exhaust as a start. In addition there is significant internal volume given over to the carriage of a battalion of troops and their vehicles plus the well deck to operate up to 4 LCMs.

As to what's wrong with them it appears that they have engine problems, I believe partially caused buy the wrong lubricants being used on both of them. So it seems like an institutional rather than individual issue. Not sure if the wrong lubricants were specified by the maker, were specified by the maintenance operator, were supplied incorrectly by the lube maker or it was just a training/usage error.

But apparently the damage is significant requiring reasonably significant repair time on each ship.

As for Canada operating an F-35 capable version of this sort of ship, I don't see it as being remotely needed. Our doctrine does not have us putting troops in over contested beaches in an amphibious assault, ever. When we land troops on an operation it's always in to secure ports/airports. In which case normal sealift is a much better/cheaper choice.

Add to that that we can't find the crews to man what ships we have and further add the exorbitant costs of training and operating an even smaller number of a different version of the F-35 (one that will have, no doubt, a higher rate of accidents) and it's a total non-starter.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 07, 2017, 02:05:21 AM
a different version of the F-35 (one that will have, no doubt, a higher rate of accidents)

Based upon what??
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 07, 2017, 02:11:19 AM
As for a Canadian need for such ships, it really depends on the proposed role etc.  Please note the RAN's official roles for these ships:

 - To embark, transport and deploy an embarked force (Army in the case of the ADF but could equally be an allied Army or Marines), along with their equipment and aviation units, and
 - To carry out/support humanitarian missions.

Both would be equally useful to the Canadian interest I would imagine.

More info on the RAN ships here (http://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/lhd)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kengeorge on June 07, 2017, 11:05:04 PM
Questions, what is the deck width of an angled deck? Are all the US Navy carriers have the same width or are they different and is there a limit on wingspan for carrierborne aircraft?
At the moment all I can find out with any confidence is the angled decks vary from 9deg to 14deg but not the width of them, although they must be wide enough to accept a C-2 which has a span of 80 ft 7 in (24.60 m).
Could anyone shed light on this or guide me towards the relevent websites?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on June 08, 2017, 08:15:49 AM
a different version of the F-35 (one that will have, no doubt, a higher rate of accidents)

Based upon what??
A combination of known higher than average accident rates with Harriers when operated in the vertical mode coupled with the fact that the F-35 B doesn't have a 2 seat trainer version for transitional training, both of which suggest an eventual problem rate higher than equivalent conventional aircraft. The Harrier did have 2 seaters and still have a higher than average crash rate. Couple that with the very small buy and you're looking at a potential issue with proficiency and the rate of pilot training.

If we only buy 8-12 Bs, we're going to lose some and given the very small total buy, that's not really a sensible way to spend money.

You don't need much of a problem at very low altitude and zero knots to have to punch out.

But those are my opinions and everyone's got one. Doesn't really matter, we're not getting Bs.

Paul
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on June 08, 2017, 08:17:25 AM
Questions, what is the deck width of an angled deck? Are all the US Navy carriers have the same width or are they different and is there a limit on wingspan for carrierborne aircraft?
At the moment all I can find out with any confidence is the angled decks vary from 9deg to 14deg but not the width of them, although they must be wide enough to accept a C-2 which has a span of 80 ft 7 in (24.60 m).
Could anyone shed light on this or guide me towards the relevent websites?

If you go to the likes of Wikipedia and look up a carrier's beam, you will frequently get two numbers. The larger is the maximum width across the flight deck and the smaller one is the width of the hull at the widest point.

Paul
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 10, 2017, 05:11:07 AM
known higher than average accident rates with Harriers when operated in the vertical mode

Comparing to a completely different design that used technology some 40odd yrs older....hmmm  hardly a fair comparison.

coupled with the fact that the F-35 B doesn't have a 2 seat trainer version for transitional training, both of which suggest an eventual problem rate higher than equivalent conventional aircraft.

Or one could accept the fact that modern simulators are far, far more capable than what they used to be.  Coupled with the more modern technology of the platform itself I think people are overplaying the two seat trainer issue.  Sounds a bit like the old argument of open cockpits...

https://youtu.be/uHkpfc4gGX8


Couple that with the very small buy and you're looking at a potential issue with proficiency and the rate of pilot training.

Once again, people are looking to the past when it comes to things such as the pilot training issue.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 14, 2017, 10:55:51 AM
Putting things in perspective...

(http://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/19f34a17-cd0d-498f-9e8e-445308d22a05-original.jpeg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on June 15, 2017, 09:01:39 PM
What was the occasion Greg, there's an F-35 on the ski jump
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 16, 2017, 02:29:02 AM
I believe it was from the official HMAS Queen Elizabeth naming back in 2014.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on June 16, 2017, 10:04:38 AM
I believe it was from the official HMAS Queen Elizabeth naming back in 2014.

We-ell, she should be! ;)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on June 16, 2017, 10:05:40 PM
I believe it was from the official HMAS Queen Elizabeth naming back in 2014.

We-ell, she should be! ;)

I spotted that too, must be a 'seniors' moment  ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 17, 2017, 02:35:26 AM
Doh!  I let out an international secret...forget what you saw.  Nobody is supposed to know about the sale of the carrier to Australia yet... :-[
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on June 22, 2017, 04:54:15 AM
known higher than average accident rates with Harriers when operated in the vertical mode

Comparing to a completely different design that used technology some 40odd yrs older....hmmm  hardly a fair comparison.
It's not that, it's due to the higher workload managing the extra things that have to happen in the cockpit in a VTOL situation. Automation has taken care of a lot, but not everything.
Quote

coupled with the fact that the F-35 B doesn't have a 2 seat trainer version for transitional training, both of which suggest an eventual problem rate higher than equivalent conventional aircraft.

Or one could accept the fact that modern simulators are far, far more capable than what they used to be.  Coupled with the more modern technology of the platform itself I think people are overplaying the two seat trainer issue.  Sounds a bit like the old argument of open cockpits...

https://youtu.be/uHkpfc4gGX8
Simulators are great and get you a lot of the way there, but several air forces that have been cutting back on actual flying time as budgets are reduced, including the USAF, are starting to see an uptick in accidents. Actual stick time does matter.

Couple that with the very small buy and you're looking at a potential issue with proficiency and the rate of pilot training.

Once again, people are looking to the past when it comes to things such as the pilot training issue.
[/quote]
No, as I said above, actual stick time does matter. Simulators don't do everything.

But, in the end, we'll see how it all works out. Maybe I'm wrong.

Paul
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on July 02, 2017, 06:18:20 PM
Wow, just wow!

I just came across a cabinet memo in the Australian national archive referencing a report I am reading referencing the defmins inquiry into the way forward after the UKs decision to retain Invincible post Falklands.

NAA A10756, LC3015
Replacement Aircraft Carrier for HMAS Melbourne [Submission Nos. 4305, 5234, 5318, 5322, 5333, 5338 and 5354 refer]

Invincible, Garabaldi, modified LPH, SCS, modified merchant ship options etc. I knew existed, but didn't realise we were revisiting all of them and I had no idea a conventionally powered CdG and a Ctol LHA/LHD (Tarawa/Wasp) existed let alone were being looked at!  The CTOL option were expected to offset their greater acquisition cost by saving money operating existing types, including F/A-18s.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 03, 2017, 03:00:52 AM
Hmmm...a RAN FAA F/A-18A would be a nice subtle whiff.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on July 03, 2017, 10:27:22 PM
Hmmm...a RAN FAAF/A-18 A would be a nice subtle whiff.

How freaky to discover the axle deck CTOL LHA derived CVS we were speculating about was actually a genuine proposition!
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 04, 2017, 02:07:09 AM
Was aware of - it is mentioned in this book I believe:

(https://d3525k1ryd2155.cloudfront.net/h/672/986/714986672.0.l.1.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on July 04, 2017, 01:41:35 PM
Was aware of - it is mentioned in this book I believe:

(https://d3525k1ryd2155.cloudfront.net/h/672/986/714986672.0.l.1.jpg)

I have that book but it doesn't mention the cat equipped LHA just a "modified" one with 50 helicopters and harriers.  There may have been an earlier mention of an LHA derived CVS with cats in the text from prior to the 1980 decision to shortlist V/STOL carriers only but I don't recall it.

I find it interesting that the US is now looking at an axle deck cat equipped CVS, most likely based on the America class LHA.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 05, 2017, 02:27:53 AM
Ah, maybe my mind is playing tricks on me - unfortunately, my copy is packed away at the moment so I can't check.

Are you able to post the Reports (or parts thereof) that you have found?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on July 05, 2017, 03:14:10 PM
i'll dig it out when I have the chance (school holidays at the moment so no guarantees when.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 10, 2017, 02:33:07 AM
Two Australian LHDstogether:

(http://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/4b0c5158-975c-4dc9-aba4-7f9d9cc3cba6-original.jpeg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on July 10, 2017, 04:18:03 AM
Looks like you've got a lot of sick ships there ----
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: exkiwiforces on July 21, 2017, 11:15:57 AM
You guys, are giving me some really good ideas for a late 1970's Far East Fleet. The idea is the Brits don't fully withdraw from Singers, but maintain a small but highly effective FEF to support the two reduce Brigades in the region the 28th Commonwealth Brigade and the Gurkha Brigade along with the Honkers Brigade which is under the command of UKForces Hong Kong.

The RAF maintains a small support group in the Far East, such as the Wessex Sqn in Honkers and a small rotary FLT at the Jungle School, but no combat Aircraft except for the odd ex and the odd Nimrod deployment.

The Royal Navy, Far East Fleet is base around 1 Malta Class and HMS Victorious Carriers with HMAS Hermes being the 3rd Carrier and along with her escort group. The Amphibious SQN is built around 1x RM Battalion Goup with a Fearless Class LPD and Tobruk Class LSL. When combined with the Combine ANZAC Amphibious SQN it becomes a Brigade size group. Support Group is RFA, RAN and RNZN. All FEF ships are based in Singers apart from UKForces Hong Kong RN Ships, and both RAN and RNZN rotate through Singers as required.

Both Australia and New Zealand  each maintains an Battalion Group, with the Australian Battalion Group in the Butterworth area and the Kiwi's in Singers. They have formed a combine Air Task Group split between the Butterworth and Singers built around Fighter Sqn, Maritime FLT, Transport Sqn and Rotary Wing SQN.

As a result of the last Commonwealth Heads of Meeting, Great Britain said it will ditch its idea to join the EEC, but formed a Commonwealth Common Market (CCM) and the Commonwealth Defence Organisation (CDO) which reinforces the Five Power Defence Treaty already signed.

As a result of this arrangement see's Australian and New Zealand Navies re-quip with modified British design Naval Ships built in Australian Shipyards and the both the Navy Dockyards in Singers, Australian and in New Zealand along the Shipyards in Australia provide support ie refits etc to the FEF also noting that Simonstown Agreement is still maintain which later becomes very handy during the Falkland's war.

The Australian Navy see's the HMS Hermes transfer to the RAN. Her Air Group is the 3 Skyhawk SQNS (2 RAN and 1 RNZAF/RNZN) with each maintaining a SQN each at home as well. Combined ASW SQN of Gannets SQN, AEW FLT, the COD Section is base on the Dornier V/STOL Transport (as a result of the UK selling the Harrier to Germany) and SAR FLT.

HMAS Melbourne becomes a ASW/ Command Assault Carrier for the Combine ANZAC Amphibious SQN.

The RAN has 3 Daring Class Destroyers which are later replaced by 6 County class destroyers, 12 Type 12 Leander class and 6 Type 12 River Class Frigates.

Support Group is 2 Fort Class Ships and 2 Leaf class ships.

Amphibious Group is 1x Fearless LPD, 2 x Tobruk Class LSL and 2RAR is transferred to the RAN to formed Royal Australian Marines and is slowly expanded to a Brigade minus.

Small Ship Group is what ever present number is.

The New Zealand Armed Forces see's a massive change under big Norm Kirk.

RNZN has 6 Type 12 Leander class and retains the 2 Type Whitby Frigates and later a 3rd is added.

Support Group/ Amphibious Group is 1x Fort Class, 1x Leaf Class (Both Ships are also able to do the run south), 1x Fearless LPD and Tobruk Class LSL ships.

1x Ice breaker/ Repair Ship (Fleet Standby Ship)

Home/ SW Pacific SQN is not part of the FEF ORBAT.

The Army is re-rolled to a Light Amphibious Group with 1x RF Battalion Grp, 1x High Readiness Battalion Grp (TF Soldiers on a 5yr contract with 18mths fulltime service) 4 TF Battalions later reduced to 3 with a reinforce Armoured Group of 5 Sqns (3 Cav and 2 APC SQN's) which is not part of ORBAT of Light Amphibious Group, but used as a bolt on when required ie 1x Cav and 1x APC SQN's.

The biggest Change is the RNZAF itself.

The Air Strike wing becomes is a Joint Force command (RNZAF/ FAA) with 2 A4 Skyhawk SQN's with one SQN assigned to HMAS Hermes and the other SQN based in NZ along with the Light Attack/ Lead in Fighter SQN.

Maritime Group is a Joint Force command is based around 5SQN using 9 P3's and 6SQN using Gannets minus one FLT as its assigned to HMAS Hermes.

The Rotary Wing is a Joint Force command with 3SQN and the FAA SQN that's assigned to Support/Amphibious Group equip with Wessex Helo's, expect for the Frigate base Helo's  that SQN is solely FAA equip with Wasps and later Lynx's Helo's.

Transport Group is 9 C-130's, 6 Belfasts and 18 Heralds.

All Flying training is run by the RNZAF and the FAA. 


Once my other builds are out of the way and I'm happy with skill level. I'm going to convert my 1/600 Airfix HMS Victorious to a 1/700 Malta Class and slowly build dream FEF up.





   
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on July 21, 2017, 03:51:50 PM
You guys, are giving me some really good ideas for a late 1970's Far East Fleet. The idea is the Brits don't fully withdraw from Singers, but maintain a small but highly effective FEF to support the two reduce Brigades in the region the 28th and the Gurkha along with the Honkers Brigade.

The RAF maintains a small support group in the Far East, such as the Wessex Sqn in Honkers and a small rotary FLT at the Jungle School, but no combat Aircraft except for the odd ex and the odd Nimrod deployment. 

More to follow soon

The plans as I understood them was five CV/CVA to cover NATO and east of Suez commitments, then three CV/CVA to cover the east of Suez and several Escort Cruisers for NATO (I know it was always at least five but have heard eight as well, five for NATO as HUK group leaders and three for CVA escort duties).  Then, after the cancellation of CVA-01 and the withdrawal from East of Suez it was six Command/ASW Helicopter Cruisers (the spiritual successor to the Escort Cruiser) that evolved into the Invincible class with numbers cut to three for financial reasons.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: exkiwiforces on July 21, 2017, 04:50:57 PM
In my FEF ORBAT I have one Malta Class, HMS Victorious, HMAS Hermes and HMAS Melbourne in her swing role. With HMS Ark Royal, Eagle and Two Malta Class Carriers to the Home Fleet/ Med SQN along with the Canadian Carrier.

Which later on are replace by  new 3 build Malta Class and 6 Invincible class carriers built between the British and Australian Shipyards under the Commonwealth Defence Organisation (CDO).

 

 
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 22, 2017, 04:50:24 AM
I'm going to convert my 1/600 Airfix HMS Victorious to a 1/700 Malta Class


Looking forward to this.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: exkiwiforces on July 22, 2017, 12:25:29 PM
I'm going to convert my 1/600 Airfix HMS Victorious to a 1/700 Malta Class


Looking forward to this.

I'm hoping to start this as a wet season project around Nov, but its depends on a few such as med cat at work ie if they med dischange me etc.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: exkiwiforces on July 22, 2017, 12:32:56 PM
If the RN maintain its fixed wing after the CVA-01 had cancel. Would HMS Hermes been due for another major refit? If so what would Flight deck look like? And this would have been the same as HMS Eagle and HMS Ark Royal?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kitnut617 on July 22, 2017, 08:45:08 PM
Thorvic (Geoff Baker) over on the Secret Projects Forum (you have to be a registered member to see any pics) or on the What-If Modelers Forum would be the person to talk to. He's done numerous carrier builds of all the various proposed refits.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: jcf on July 23, 2017, 03:09:16 AM
Hickman Sea Sled with Caproni bomber, WWI US experiment. 55mph top speed.

(http://spoonercentral.com/knappseasleds/ss3.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 23, 2017, 04:31:38 AM
Cool
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: ysi_maniac on February 04, 2018, 11:07:08 PM
Studying config of carriers during WWII I noticed that only japanese  tried funnel out of island. in my opinion funnel in the opposite side to island looks sensible for the sake of balance. In the same way, exhausting sideways or downwards sounds sensible too.

Why these  aiternative dispositions were not continued?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on April 05, 2018, 06:03:59 AM
Something different:

(http://www.combatreform.org/Image848.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: The Big Gimper on April 05, 2018, 06:37:00 AM
Already forwarded to Elon Musk. If he can land a booster on an itsy-bitsy barge why not the reverse?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Frank3k on April 05, 2018, 10:56:45 AM
I can see Culture Agent Musk funding this:

(http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/i/ithacus1.jpg)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on April 06, 2018, 01:01:05 AM
Sea Launch had been launching satellites off the back of a converted oil rig for a number of years before they went bankrupt.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on May 26, 2018, 09:44:14 PM
Just a mash of two ideas.
1. The many USN concepts from the 70s and 80s for sea control ships, helicopter conversions of the Spruance hull, hybrid V/STOL carrier version of the Strike Cruiser etc.
2. The occasional US willingness to consider, or even adopt foriegn designs when their own efforts don't work out, i.e. Harrier, Goshawk, both LCS designs, most of the frigate designs being looked at currently etc.


The result of this thinking:

Having cancelled the SCS and with the air capable Spruances leading nowhere,(while the Navy was losing the last of their CVS's, just as the Soviet submarine threat, along with the Bear long range air and sea launched antiship missile threat was increasing) the USN deside to look at foriegn designs to form the basis of a aviation cruiser.  THe selected design is the Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi, suitably modified with either NTU derived or AEGIS combat system and SM-2.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on May 27, 2018, 03:11:48 AM
It would be interesting to see why they would consider/choose something such as the Giuseppe Garibaldi over their own designs such as the SCS which essentially became represented in real life by the Spanish Príncipe de Asturias or even a modification of a LHA/LHD such as the Tarawa class.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on May 27, 2018, 07:18:58 PM
It would be interesting to see why they would consider/choose something such as the Giuseppe Garibaldi over their own designs such as the SCS which essentially became represented in real life by the Spanish Príncipe de Asturias or even a modification of a LHA/LHD such as the Tarawa class.

The SCS was very austere and quite slow, hence the USN interest in Spruance based designs that however proved to be very compromised on the aviation side of things.  The LHA was also slow as well as very expensive, incorporating may features that added nothing to its aviation capabilities.  Basically the US could have designed the perfect ship for themselves but assuming the requirement was realised during the late 70s, early 80s for the expanded 600 ship navy at the height of the cold war, the entire detail design capacity of the eastern sea board was working on the Arleigh Burke Class AEGIS destroyer.

No suitable existing designs and no spare design capacity, plus an urgent requirement, means an existing design, at that point either Invincible or Garibaldi.  Systems commonality makes the Italian ship more attractive.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on May 28, 2018, 11:53:56 PM
The result of this thinking:

Having cancelled the SCS and with the air capable Spruances leading nowhere,(while the Navy was losing the last of their CVS's, just as the Soviet submarine threat, along with the Bear long range air and sea launched antiship missile threat was increasing) the USN deside to look at foriegn designs to form the basis of a aviation cruiser.  THe selected design is the Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi, suitably modified with either NTU derived or AEGIS combat system and SM-2.
To figure out if this makes sense, we really need to expand on the mission/role of these ships. If the mission is convoy escort (the SCS mission) then, yeah, you can probably get away with something as small as the Garibaldi, armed with a dozen helos and 6-ish F-35s for convoy air cover. You're still relying upon frigates and destroyers to provide proper air defense.

If you want the ship to also anchor the air defense, allowing the ship escorts to be smaller, specialised, ASW frigates and corvettes, then the Garibaldi isn't big enough and you need something that can carry both the air element _and_ a substantial VLS farm of at least 100 cells. You're probably looking at about 20-25K tons as the smallest platform that can manage both roles. Missile armaments in the 70s, when the SCSs were conceived, were a lot shorter than they are today, bot the attackers and the defenders. As a dedicated escort, a modern CSC would need to tie up at least a Burke class destroyer or two destroyers armed with fewer missiles in order to provide the air defense needed for a valuable convoy. A complement of 6-ish F-35s isn't going to be able to provide a terribly in-depth AAD for a convoy, It'll need an AAD destroyer or two or need to carry the AAMs itself.

If it is not being used to carry the AAMs, then it probably doesn't need the advanced combat system as the air warfare destroyer will have the combat system along with its AAMs.

Decisions, decisions.  :D

Paul

Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on December 31, 2018, 06:58:36 AM
Just found that you can get a 1/700 Malta Class from Imperial Hobby Productions - it ain't cheap though...

(https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/6/1/7/1029617-29191-31-pristine.jpg)

https://www.shapeways.com/product/4EZ4XLWYK/1-700-hms-malta-hull?optionId=57250460https://www.shapeways.com/marketplace?type=product&q=700+Malta+class (https://www.shapeways.com/product/4EZ4XLWYK/1-700-hms-malta-hull?optionId=57250460https://www.shapeways.com/marketplace?type=product&q=700+Malta+class)

Am still tempted though.  Idea would be to do it post angled deck fit out.  Maybe have story that the Malta class were completed and distributed throughout Commonwealth:

HMS Africa:  Becomes HMSAS South Africa
HMS Gibraltar:  Becomes HMAS Australia
HMS Malta:  Becomes HMCS Canada
HMS New Zealand:  Becomes HMCS New Zealand
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on December 31, 2018, 09:00:00 PM
Divorces have happened over less but still tempting.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on January 01, 2019, 03:01:40 AM
Be interesting to see an angled-deck conversion.  I wonder if such might have happened during the initial build phase?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Old Wombat on January 01, 2019, 04:38:14 PM
Just found that you can get a 1/700 Malta Class from Imperial Hobby Productions - it ain't cheap though...

(https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/6/1/7/1029617-29191-31-pristine.jpg)

https://www.shapeways.com/product/4EZ4XLWYK/1-700-hms-malta-hull?optionId=57250460https://www.shapeways.com/marketplace?type=product&q=700+Malta+class (https://www.shapeways.com/product/4EZ4XLWYK/1-700-hms-malta-hull?optionId=57250460https://www.shapeways.com/marketplace?type=product&q=700+Malta+class)

Am still tempted though.  Idea would be to do it post angled deck fit out.  Maybe have story that the Malta class were completed and distributed throughout Commonwealth:

HMS Africa:  Becomes HMSAS South Africa
HMS Gibraltar:  Becomes HMAS Australia
HMS Malta:  Becomes HMCS Canada
HMS New Zealand:  Becomes HMCS New Zealand

Kiwiland doesn't get a carrier? ??? ;)


1/350 in full production run styrene would be more my speed. ::)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on January 01, 2019, 09:14:39 PM
Personally I think one of the biggest shames for the RN was that they didn't manage to proceed with the Maltas.  They were quite different to the previous British carriers in that the hanger and flight deck were superstructure and not part of an armoured box so likely would have been easier to convert to an angled deck configuration than the armoured fleets were.  Their size was not that different to the Midways but I believe they had higher freeboard which would have been a bonus.

Idealy the UK would have continued the Maltas and second batch of Centaurs in slow time or even suspending, but not cancelling them, while accellerating the completion of the Audicious and first batch of Centaurs before completing the Maltas and the "Hermes" to a modernised design from the mid to late 50s.  The incomplete Colossus and Majestics would sold or scrapped, the completed ones sold or transfered.  I even had the idea (quite improbabe that it would ever happen) that a number of the Colossus and Majestics could have been transfered to the USN as CVS and / or (alternatives to the converted Essex) to offset the UKs Lend Lease debt, a win win in that the USN gets a perfectly capable but much more economical platform for the CVS role.

Legacy carriers, specifically the four materiely sound armoured fleet carriers would be transfered / sold as soon as the Audicious and Centaur class ships were available, with Illustrius and Formidable scrapped.  The nations acquiring the armoured fleets and Colossus and Majestics would be possible customers for the Audacious and Centaurclasses, with or without modernisations.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on January 02, 2019, 03:12:14 AM
HMS New Zealand:  Becomes HMCS New Zealand

Kiwiland doesn't get a carrier? ??? ;)
Errr...typo on my part.  Was supposed to be HMNZS New Zealand.  Though it would be partially staffed by current/ex-RN staff...
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: dy031101 on January 02, 2019, 01:08:28 PM
BuShips 1955 self-protecting CVAN

(http://www.shipbucket.com/drawings/639/file)

Original post HERE (http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8457).

======================================================================

While a reversal of what the design seems actually intended for (vertical-takeoff interceptors and a smaller number of CATOBAR bombers & night fighters), I like the idea of using Vertijets as a backup in the event of total catapult malfunctions (because I like that World Navy aircraft carrier in Thunderbirds), and I like the Shipbucket graph author's use of the Ryan Model 115C instead of a pure Vertijet, if only for the possibility of conventional, arrested recovery- in fact, Vertijet-style landing on a ship is too much for my ameteur mind to comprehend  ;D
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Jeffry Fontaine on March 01, 2019, 02:52:17 AM
So much detail in such a small scale.

(http://www.hyperscale.com/images/enterprise350je_1.jpg) (http://www.hyperscale.com/2019/galleries/enterprise350jg_1.htm)
Tamiya 1:350th scale USS Enterprise (CVN-65) built by by Jorge Evandro (http://www.hyperscale.com/2019/galleries/enterprise350jg_1.htm)

Click on image or html to view at Hyperscale (http://www.hyperscale.com/).
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on June 15, 2019, 03:57:47 AM
An interesting photo showing the size comparison between HMAS Melbourne and the USS Enterprise:

(https://the-drive-3.imgix.net/https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1539848134744-b5633df96e942a103040d3dc5f1cfa71.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&ixlib=js-1.2.1&s=71210c805e8e4fab18e84c667d2cb597)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on July 10, 2019, 02:05:44 PM
Is anyone aware of any of the navies that operated the Majestic-class aircraft carrier ever studied/considered incorporating a 'deck-edge' aircraft lift in place of the aft 'mid flight-deck lift', so as to not inhibit flight operations?
Would such a 'deck-edge' aircraft lift be obtainable in terms of engineering, in the case of a major refit?

MAD
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on July 11, 2019, 02:37:51 AM
Would such a 'deck-edge' aircraft lift be obtainable in terms of engineering, in the case of a major refit?
With enough time and money, just about anything is possible. Is it likely, though, is the question.

Given the small size of the ships, weight and balance are critical things and hanging a 60's era fighter/ASW aircraft out on a heavy elevator at maximum distance from the centreline isn't going to be a trivial thing. Being so small, there are few places to put an elevator that don't get in the way of operations and can be managed from a balance POV. Possible one elevator just forward of the island and one on the port side right aft. The aft elevator would be unusable during recovery and the fwd elevator might be unusable during cat shots. Which is not too different that the arrangement with the CL elevators, which may be why they weren't moved in the first place.

To move them would mean a reasonably substantial rearrangement of the internals of the hangar deck plus making structural access out through the sides of the ship. Again., doable, but not trivial and, given the commercial nature of these ships' design, possibly structurally unsound.

But, as the song says, if "you got the money honey, I got the elevators" or words to that effect...

Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on July 11, 2019, 04:12:15 AM
Thanks for your informative reply tankmodelet!

Very interesting perspective, which makes sense. I've got something in the works with jonesthetank, and it just crossed my mind - 'did any of the operators of the Majestic class consider such a modification, considering the longevity of the design, which ironically were designed and build for a life expectancy of what 3-years. 😯
Any how, was hoping such a practical modification/application (Iwo Jima class LPH type elevator for example) might have improved flight operations and tempo .....

No point asking about the feasibility of substituting gas turbines for their boiler power plant then 😬

Thanks again

MAD
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Jonesthetank on July 11, 2019, 04:20:54 AM
Uh oh, I feel another descent into the Shipbucket back catalogue coming on!

Ready when you are!

Mark
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on July 11, 2019, 07:44:44 AM
Uh oh, I feel another descent into the Shipbucket back catalogue coming on!

Ready when you are!

Mark

😂😂You mean I haven't broken your mind yet Mark?😂😂

Believe it or not, I dreamed of this conversation/modification the other night! I put it down to the flu I've been suffering, obviously making me somewhat delusional, as I have to admit, I much prefer dreaming of beautiful scantily dressed woman serving on the mortar line!!😯

But alas Mark, this modification to the Majestic-class doesn't sound practical or cost effective 😩

I'll hopefully email you tomorrow, if that's ok?

MAD
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Jonesthetank on July 11, 2019, 04:57:48 PM
Hi Rob,

I think changing the drawings of HMAS Sydney or Melbourne would be easy, but I suspect in the real world the effort of the conversion to deck edge lifts would have bankrupted the RAN if not the whole of the ADF!

Quote
😂😂You mean I haven't broken your mind yet Mark?😂😂
- I'm married, have 3 kids and used to be a primary school teacher - your ideas and requests are no problem by comparison!!

Email when you can, my mood may be dependent on the outcome of the semi-final at Edgbaston today  ;D

Cheers

Mark
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 12, 2019, 03:41:32 AM
I suspect in the real world the effort of the conversion to deck edge lifts would have bankrupted the RAN if not the whole of the ADF!

Yes, probably be easier to acquire a complete new carrier.  I could only see such a mod going ahead if there were no other options and even then it would be questionable.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: tankmodeler on July 12, 2019, 11:59:30 PM
No point asking about the feasibility of substituting gas turbines for their boiler power plant then 😬
The technical feasibility of changing the steam turbines for gas turbines is probably easier than the elevator question. The financial feasibility is worse, however.

Technically, you gain in economy, manpower requirements and especially internal volume in the engine room. You lose in needing to add significant air intake and exhaust/cooling and heat recovery exchangers and, in the balance, you are significantly ahead, to be sure. But, financially! Hoo, boy, is it expensive. It could only be done at a major refit and, from a timing perspective, probably should be done when an angled deck was added, it's that level of major change. But the angled decks were added 10-15 years before effective naval gas turbine systems were available.

Still, if you were doing it, you'd need to open up the ship, right down to the keel, pull out boilers, steam turbines and recuperators, install gas turbines, new much larger airways (in and out) and new higher efficiency recuperators. New stacks, rejig the island to manage that, new bunkerage, piping and pumps to manage the lighter crude/kerosene used for naval gas turbines and then reallocate the interior spaces to use the volume you free up from eliminating the boilers and all the steam trunking.

You's still need steam generation capability, though, if you keep the cats. And that may be why the US went from oil fired steam turbines to nuke steam turbines. Simply because they absolutely needed steam, anyway, to run the cats.

If steam cats are retained it simply may not make any sense to delete the boilers. If you switch to pure helo ops or VTOL/ski jump ops, then going to gas turbine may be useful. The Brit Invincible-class carriers are all GT powered and none have ever had a cat.

Quote
Thanks again
Pas de probleme, mon ami.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: M.A.D on July 13, 2019, 09:46:40 PM
Thank you once again tankmodeler, very informative, and a good deterant 😉

Guess that means scratch one major carrier update 😩

MAD
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: kerick on July 13, 2019, 10:12:59 PM
Sounds like it would be easier to build a new ship design from the keel up.
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on July 14, 2019, 04:47:28 AM
Sounds like it would be easier to build a new ship design from the keel up.

Probably even cheaper still to buy a second hand one from someone else...
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: Volkodav on July 14, 2019, 08:39:34 PM
This sounds like the discussions in the UK in the early 50s, the RN wanted new carriers and the government wanted to rebuild old ones because they thought it was more economical.  The Government got its way, it turned out to be hideously expensive and inefficient with the end result being the progressive down sizing and eventual retirement of the strike carrier fleet.  Apparently Lord Mountbatten was furious when he was advised that the government had approved the reconstruction of the armoured fleet carriers and the completion of the Tiger Class cruisers instead of the desired new build carriers that would have been similar in size to the USNs Midways but designed with all the modern features, angled deck, steam catapults etc.

Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: GTX_Admin on August 18, 2019, 03:15:04 AM
A week after the Battle of Midway  the USN proposed to finish it's currently building battleships the Iowa class as full scale full sized aircraft carriers similar in appearance to then under construction Essex class:

(https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/08aa4d77-0718-40f2-bb4a-c61352d22946/dde76qr-871a9adc-d78a-4061-8a3e-427708bf42f2.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcLzA4YWE0ZDc3LTA3MTgtNDBmMi1iYjRhLWM2MTM1MmQyMjk0NlwvZGRlNzZxci04NzFhOWFkYy1kNzhhLTQwNjEtOGEzZS00Mjc3MDhiZjQyZjIucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.vPabQhE-MhNuWM6wESkzjTjKgqLdIdnglCyy6uO27_k)

by Tzoli on deviantart
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: elmayerle on August 18, 2019, 12:00:15 PM
Would have been interesting to see USS Kentucky and USS Illinois completed like that.  Wonder what a similar conversion of a Montana-class would look like?  By the same token, I've been doodling concepts for a FACES II conversion of a Montana-class.

Along the same lines, since the RN looked at battlecarrier hybrids of the Lion-class, how about the equivalent of a FACES II conversion of an HMS Vanguard that wasn't scrapped in 1960 or thereabouts?
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: The Big Gimper on August 19, 2019, 11:10:38 AM
Found on Facebook.

"How's this for a what-if (From the Special Hobbies FB page, at the IPMS Nats) - Vought F5Us operating from a converted California-class battleship"

(https://scontent.fxds1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/67810919_712843725822657_5092310940662104064_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&_nc_oc=AQmVFxBqoV8LBa2_zHgOIFru8Ym28buOM0E1oVTvSLTI75fsSv-0nVuNQ_cClX4buLM&_nc_ht=scontent.fxds1-1.fna&oh=a2b6b0b1ade445c6e1f699951899aff4&oe=5DD03499)
Title: Re: Aircraft Carrier Ideas and Inspiration
Post by: finsrin on August 20, 2019, 02:53:20 PM
Iowa class based rendering and battleship-carrier are inspiring for builds.