Modelling > Sea

RN standardised the Ark Royal as their war emergency carrier design

(1/5) > >>

Volkodav:
Instead of designing and building the Armoured Fleet Carriers the UK standardised the Ark Royal with various improvements indicated during the build of Ark, as their war emergency carrier design.

It was already in production, it carried for more aircraft, it could have continued to have been built without interruption of a new design.  More carriers built, more aircraft at sea, doctrine behind the design was more inline with US and Japanese, i.e. closer to ideal than the Armoured Fleets.  When time permitted the expansion of the design with lessons learnt would have resulted in an even larger more capable design than the Implacable or following Audacious designs.  Enough of the ships could have been built to supply to allies during the war, more ships available could have saved Force Z.

Late war construction would have been closer to Midways in size and capacity leaving the RN with a far more capable legacy fleet going into the Cold War.  These larger, roomier ships would have been far better at operating jets then the Armour Fleets and would have been far easier and cheaper to upgrade and modernise.

Weaver:
The problem with the Ark as designed was narrow lifts. Her longitudinal strength lay not just in the edges of the deck but also down the middle, so the lifts were narrow rectangles to either side of the centreline to avoid breaking the "beam". An "Ark Royal Mk.II" could certainly have got around that by having big centre lifts and all the bending loads taken by the hangar sides, but then you'd be approaching the condition of the armoured fleets with a lot of weight in the hangar walls, and that would drive you to reduce the hangar heights, with unfortunate consequences post-war.

Hangar height was the defining problem in post-war modernisations. The situation had actually got worse through the war, with the pressure to carry more aircraft resulting in Implacable and Indefatigable having double hangers with just 14" under the beams (too low to store an F-4U Corsair, never mind later jets!). This is why the re-build program started with Victorious, since her single-deck hangar was easier to strip down and re-build. Vicki's re-build turned into a nightmare and that's why they never attempted in on the later, harder hulls.

Volkodav:

--- Quote from: Weaver on April 19, 2014, 04:28:20 AM ---The problem with the Ark as designed was narrow lifts. Her longitudinal strength lay not just in the edges of the deck but also down the middle, so the lifts were narrow rectangles to either side of the centreline to avoid breaking the "beam". An "Ark Royal Mk.II" could certainly have got around that by having big centre lifts and all the bending loads taken by the hangar sides, but then you'd be approaching the condition of the armoured fleets with a lot of weight in the hangar walls, and that would drive you to reduce the hangar heights, with unfortunate consequences post-war.

Hangar height was the defining problem in post-war modernisations. The situation had actually got worse through the war, with the pressure to carry more aircraft resulting in Implacable and Indefatigable having double hangers with just 14" under the beams (too low to store an F-4U Corsair, never mind later jets!). This is why the re-build program started with Victorious, since her single-deck hangar was easier to strip down and re-build. Vicki's re-build turned into a nightmare and that's why they never attempted in on the later, harder hulls.

--- End quote ---

Yes the Implacable modernisation would have seen the hangers amalgamated into one.

My thinking on Ark was her greater size and volume avoided the constraints of the Armoured Fleets, as a war emergency post escalation clause the design could have been strengthened and improved from lessons learnt without having to worry about displacement limits.  Structural strengthening to permit larger or even relocated lifts, diesel generators etc. for improved damage control.

Back on the Impacables, they could have operated and hangered Grumman Tigers and Super Tigers with the low hangers  ;D

Weaver:

--- Quote from: Volkodav on April 19, 2014, 10:02:54 AM ---Back on the Impacables, they could have operated and hangered Grumman Tigers and Super Tigers with the low hangers  ;D

--- End quote ---

Good spot - I never noticed that!  :)  13'10" to the tip of the fin in parked condition: two inches to spare!  No folded wing problem to complicate matters either because the Tiger only folded a short section of it's wingtip downwards. Mind you, I intend to fix that for my RN versions, with the wing folding upwards level with the tips of the tailplanes, but moving though about 270 deg so that the tips end up just resting on the fuselage.

Volkodav:
One thing I have never understood is with the RNs two largest and most capable carriers being limited to aircraft that could fit in a 14" high hanger, why they didn't just write specifications for aircraft that would fit?  If they fit in a 14" hanger they would fit in all the other carriers, the UK could have future proofed themselves saving huge sums on money spent on modernisations and invested that money instead on a new generation of carriers with taller hangers that could cross deck US aircraft.  Had the UK been able to retain Victorious, Indomitable and the Implacables with minimal structural modifications along side Eagle, Ark, they could have sold the Centaurs and Hermes to Commonwealth navies in place of the Majestics, in turn future proofing them as well.

Design the aircraft to fit and the RN could have retained four of the Armoured Fleet Carriers through the 50s into the 60s with minimal affordable angle deck and steam catapult refits.  I don't understand why they didn't do it.

That aside the Sea Vampire and Venom fit, unfolded the Seahawk fit (they could have unfolded it on the lift before moving it into the hanger; from the mid 50s the Fury, Tiger and Skyray fit and the Sea Vixen should have been fairly easy to design to fit as well, the Gannet fit with an inch to spare AEW did not so would have been a deck park option.  Too bad the RN didn't look outside the square and keep these ships in service much longer, freeing up cash for a new generation in the 60s.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page