Author Topic: Aircraft Carriers  (Read 172212 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hobbes

  • Stores peanuts in his mailbox
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6691
    • Acme Engineering
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #15 on: August 26, 2005, 12:17:21 am »
Germany had several companies involved in VTOL designs: Dornier (Do 31), VFW-Fokker (VAK 191), and EWR-Sud (VJ 101), so these would all be good candidates.

If you want to trace the history of these companies (which is ridiculously convoluted), see: EADS history part 1
part 2
part 3

Offline elmayerle

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6413
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2005, 10:39:20 pm »
Well, yeah, I'm rather aware of that.  Actually, I've read the history of post-war German vstol efforts that an international vsotl history society put together and it's fascinating reading.  There's some absolutely fascinating items there.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Offline Nigel Bunker

  • Remembers with pleasure their Gents Cast Iron Urinal
  • What-IF SIG
  • Targeted for assassination by JMNs
  • ****
  • Posts: 796
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #17 on: April 11, 2006, 03:03:08 am »
I was hunting for information on HMS Queen Elizabeth (CVA-01) and HMS Duke of Edinburgh (CVA-02) and came across this site:

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cva01.htm

I hadn't realised how big they were to be - nearly the size of a Nimitz class carrier. Shows Invincible, Illustrious, etc up for the pocket sized carriers they really are.

The section on the air group is particularly interesting.  

Phantoms
The initial order for F-4Ks was 143 but was later reduced to 48, presumably the missing 95 became part of the RAF order for F-4Ms. As the two super carriers were to carry a maximum of 18 F-4s each, with say a further 18 for the Yeovilton training squadron, where were the other 89 to be used? Even allowing for those lost to deep maintenance, that means that a further 3 or possibly 4 squadrons were to be formed. Were these to be shore based or did RN have plans for CVA-03 up it's sleeve?

AEW & COD
The HS 125 was considered as an AEW platform but rejected on performance. Presumably it was under-powered with twin Vipers but presumably it could have been re-engined (as were later 125 models). Also it was offered as a COD plane but would it have needed a cargo door similar to those fitted to VC-10 C.1s?

Jaguar
The Navy were interested in this for use on smaller carriers - presumably Ark Royal and Eagle. A Jaguar M with a radar nose is interesting - puts it in the A-7 class.

AFVG
Considered as a replacement for Buccaneer - presumably when this went tits up, the RN would have bought Tornado - Tornado S.2 anybody.

Doubtless TSR2Joe and Thorvic have more information on designs. Interesting to think what might have been before we entered that cul-de-sac that is VTOL


 
Life's too short to apply all the stencils

Geoff_B

  • Guest
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #18 on: April 11, 2006, 04:23:18 am »
Hi Nigel

Yeap a VG dual role CAP fighter and strike aircraft were envisoned for FAA use. phantom was only meant to be a stop gap to replace the Sea Vixens untill the VG aircraft were ready which would have replaced both the Buccanner and the Phantom. AFVG actually can be traced back in some from to the Vicker 583  and before that to the vickers designs that evloved from Barnes Wallis's Swallow program. The 583 which was originally rejected in favour of the joint 1154 program. It was only after the cancellation of the TSR2 that the VG strike fighter was re-evolved into a dedictaed strike aircraft rather than the original multi-role mode it was intended to be.

Yeap got the drawings of the HS.125 AEW as well as the P139, even sent them to Richard for his book on the CVA-01. Hopefully after the TSR2 book joe will get back to his long term CVA-01 project.

As for VTOL i doubt Harrier would agree with you, if we had put greater effort into the VTOL designs then the P1216 could have been in front line service operating from new decent sized STOVL carriers. its the conviction and execution thats been the problem. the SHAR should have been based upon the AV-16 (pre AV-8B) as the limitiation of the original Harrier fudelage/Pegasus were well known back before 1973 !!!!!!!. Instead we muddled through spending the least we could get away with.

Cheers

Geoff

Offline AeroplaneDriver

  • Not licensed to do this sort of thing
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
  • Busy repainting the Jetstream in Red Arrows colors
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #19 on: April 11, 2006, 05:12:32 am »
Quote
Instead we muddled through spending the least we could get away with.

Cheers

Geoff
And with one sentence Geoff manages an accurate summary of British defense procurement over the past 40 years.
So I got that going for me...which is nice....

Offline MartG

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 689
    • Martin's Model Accessories
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #20 on: April 11, 2006, 06:39:43 am »
Quote
And with one sentence Geoff manages an accurate summary of British defense procurement over the past 40 years.
More like the last 100 years - have you ever read 'Plane Speaking' by Bill Gunston ? Most chapters relate how the British Government has done its best to screw up the UK aviation industry right from the start ;)  
Murphy's 1st Law - An object at rest will be in the wrong place
Murphy's 2nd Law - An object in motion will be going in the wrong direction
Murphy's 3rd Law - For every action, there is an equal and opposite malfunction


Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4984
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #21 on: April 11, 2006, 10:17:48 am »
Reading "British fighter secret projects" I found the plane needed by Great britain instead of Phantom and Jaguar : the blackburn P.141.  Mach, 2*M45 engines with 6000kgp each, multirole, modular conception (Ie two seat or single cockpit added on the production line etc.). This was the perfect multirole fighter GB needed to stay on the market and replace the Lightning, and Sea vixen...  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Offline roughneck06

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • http://
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #22 on: December 27, 2006, 10:14:53 pm »
A  Wif scenario:

During the Cold War, the USN starts looking at Convoy defense ASW with the CVS s nearing the end of their service lives. A few of the Independance CVLs are still available ( say- San Jacinto, Monterey, Langley ). As an interim measure before the SCS s are built- 2 to 3 of the CVLs are rebuilt and recommisioned as Proto SCS. ( I'm currently building one- I bought a CVL in 1/700 on Ebay. Seems that neither all the parts were in the kit to build it as a WW2 CVL nor Spanish Dedaldo)

Given what I have to work with- I've modified the island, installed 1 CIWS port and starboard vice 40mm mounts, a BPDMS aft vice Quad 40mm , 1 Oto Melara 76mm vice forward Quad 40mm. Air group is SH-3 Sea kings and AV-8 Harriers.

As SCSs are commissioned- any thoughts as to which navies might be interested in these Pro SCSs?

A few thoughts come to mind-

Brazil
Argentina
Netherlands
Australia
New Zealand ( hey- it get 'em into the Naval Aviation business)
Mexico ( National pride and still gives the Soviets another problem )
Canada ( ASW, limited a2a, strike capabilty- cost less $ and manpower than Bonaventure? )

Final note- given what I'm doing to my CVL/ Proto SCS- any suggestions as to flight deck markings? Thanks!

Offline JoeP

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3402
    • The Home Page of Connie and (Modeler) Joe
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2006, 10:11:40 am »
Spain's Principe de Asturias and Thailand's Chakri Nareubet are based on the SCS design, and so could be guides to flight deck markings.

JoeP
In between jobs and homes.  New job starts soon, then search for new home, space for hobby room and display cases is non-negotiable.

Offline anthonyp

  • aka Captain Obvious
  • Gone but not Forgotten
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • **********
  • Posts: 4725
    • http://hyperion.mystarship.com
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #24 on: December 29, 2006, 06:50:32 am »
Great idea!

I've often thought about updating a CVL, and there's some interesting proposals in Norman Friedman's Carrier book for such refits.  I think one of the proposals (not having the book in front of me at the moment) was to actually take a CVE, and put an angled deck on it and launch S-2's off the bow.

The refit I've been thinking of giving it would be enclosing the bow (giving it a "hurricane bow" as refit to the Midways), and giving it an 8 degree angled deck.  Nothing as extensive as was done to the Midways in their SCB.110 refit, more akin to what the RN did to their light fleet carriers to add an angled deck.

As for a prototype SCS, what you outlined is good, though I'd still enclose the bow.  That's the one part of the CVL's that always bugged me for some reason.

I can see possible nations as the ones you outlined, as well as maybe Japan and Italy.
I exist to pi$$ others off!!!
My categorized models directory on my site.
My site (currently with no model links).
"Build what YOU like, the way YOU want to." - a wise man

Offline roughneck06

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • http://
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2006, 05:14:49 pm »
Thanks ! Anthony P- I recall reading there were plans to add an angled flight deck to the USS Saipan ( then serving as a training carrier ). Additionally, RADM Dan Gallery proposed a traing carrier for the Great lakes- died off due to cost ( $ 29 million ) based on a merchat hull.

As to my CVL- given no hurricane bow- is a 76 oto melara forward. CIWS P/S, BPMS aft seem reasonable for the 1970s????

I was thining an air group of 12 SH-3 ASW, 4 Av-8, 3-4 SH-3 AEW.

Offline roughneck06

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • http://
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2007, 07:58:53 pm »
Why was the Independencia CVL deleted upon Argentina aquirring the ex Dutch Karl Doorman CVL? Money? Manpower? Anyone know how much life was left in her?
Would make for an interesting WIF if both had been modernized and in service during the Falklands War.

Offline roughneck06

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • http://
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2007, 08:05:56 pm »
Help!- My prot SCS USS langley is near completion-however....

I painted the flight deck light brown/wood color- somehow it just does not look right.

Any suggestions as to color/brand I should use to paint the flight deck? I use the spray can variety. ( My sons have my airbrush ).

Thanks!

Offline anthonyp

  • aka Captain Obvious
  • Gone but not Forgotten
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • **********
  • Posts: 4725
    • http://hyperion.mystarship.com
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2007, 09:38:50 pm »
I'd either sand off the wood "planks" on the model and say they were replaced with metal sections in a refit, or repaint them gunship grey, ala USN carrier decks, and say they wood was replaced with metal sheathed wood planks of some sort.

 :cheers:  :cheers:  
I exist to pi$$ others off!!!
My categorized models directory on my site.
My site (currently with no model links).
"Build what YOU like, the way YOU want to." - a wise man

Geoff_B

  • Guest
Re: Aircraft Carriers
« Reply #29 on: January 17, 2007, 04:32:53 am »
There should be some photos of Dedalo/ex cabot on the web and these may give you a better idea of the deck colour. Some areas of its decks were protected for Harrier operations but the rest was wood.

I think they did stain the wood but operations, sea and sunshine tends to weather and bleach the wood pretty quickly to a light tan in colour. BTW a wooden deck would only look right is the kit has a textured surface to represent the planking, if the surface is smooth than its been covered and should be painted in a more standard deck colour.